,-i/* 


,.r;r  ■?■»«;•--■:• 


n .  ■«■• 


iFntm  tl|p  Sjtbrartf  of 

BpqufatI|pJi  bg  I|im  tn 

ll|p  ICtbrary  of 

J^rtnreton  Qllipabgtral  S>pmtnarg 


■%■  If' 


;.%w 


THE 


BIBLE  DOCTRINE  OF  INSPIRATION 


EXPLAINED  AND  VINDICATED. 


THE  I 


BIBLE    DOCTRINE 


OF 


INSPIRATION 


EXPLAINED    AND     VINDICATED. 


BY 
BASIL 'manly,   D.D.,   LL.D., 

PROFESSOR  IN   THE   SOUTHERN   BAPTIST  THEOLOGICAL   SEMINARY, 
LOUISVILLE,   KY. 


NEW  YORK: 

A.   C.  ARMSTRONG   AND   SON, 

714  Broadway. 

1888. 


Copyright,  1888, 
By  Basil  Manlt. 


janfbersftj  33tes0: 
John  Wilson  and  Son,  Cambridge. 


PKEFACE. 


For  more  than  a  quarter  of  a  century  it  has  been  my 
privilege  and  duty,  in  giving  theological  instruction,  to 
discuss  the  subject  of  Inspiration.  As  each  year  I 
have  studied  it  afresh,  m}^  sense  of  its  importance  has 
increased ;  and  in  examining  the  accumulating  litera- 
ture on  the  topic  in  books,  reviews,  and  newspapers, 
I  have  felt  moved  to  get  closer  to  the  original  sources, 
and  have  determined  to  ask  the  attention  of  the  public 
to  a  study  of  it  specially  from  a  Biblical  standpoint. 

It  is  easy  to  present  theories.  But  the  question  is 
one  of  fact,  and  not  of  theor3%  The  Bible  statements 
and  the  Bible  phenomena  are  the  decisive  considera- 
tions in  the  case.  And  recognizing  this,  I  have  at- 
tempted a  frank  and  thorough  discussion  of  the  Bible 
Doctrine  of  Inspiration. 

At  the  same  time,  I  have  not  failed  to  read  anything 
that  seemed  to  promise  to  shed  light  on  the  subject. 
I  have  been  desirous  to  examine  all  sides  of  the  ques- 
tion, and  to  seek  for  truth  whether  old  or  new  ;  resolved 
neither  to  cling  slavishly  to  confessional  or  traditional 
statements,  nor  to  search  for  original  and  startling 
ideas.      Originalitj^  on  a  subject  like  this,  which  has 


VI  PREFACE. 

been  under  discussion  for  centuries,  would  surely  be 
error.  But  there  may  be,  after  all,  honest  independence 
of  inquiry',  a  careful  sifting  of  opinions,  a  fair  recasting 
of  views  in  the  mould  of  one's  own  thinking,  and  a 
subordination  of  the  whole  simply  to  the  controlling 
authority  of  God's  Word.  This  is  all  at  which  I 
have  aimed. 

I  have  freely  used  whatever  I  have  found  in  the 
writings  of  the  able  men  who  have  discussed  this  and 
kindred  themes,  without  a  studied  effort  either  to 
avoid  their  phraseology  or  to  conform  to  their  ideas 
or  expressions. 

To  the  candid,  faithful  examination  of  those  in  all 
Christian  denominations  who  love  and  honor  God's 
blessed  Word,  this  brief  work  is  offered,  whether  they 
are  disposed  to  accept  or  to  reject  the  views  advocated. 
And  may  the  blessing  of  God  rest  on  this  humble 
attempt  to  serve  Him ! 

BASIL  MANLY. 

Louisville,  Kt., 

March,  1888. 


COIS^TENTS. 


Part  iFirst* 

THE  DOCTRINE  OE  INSPIRATION. 


PAGE 


Chapter  I.    Preliminary 13 

A.  Importance  of  the  Subject 13 

B.  Deficiencies  of  an  Uninspired  Bible 15 

C.  Some  Sources  of  Misapprehension 18 

Chapter  II.    Distinctions  and  Explanations    ...  20 

A.  Inspiration  distinguished  from  Kindred  Topics     .  21 

B.  Inspiration  implies  real  Supernatural  Interposition  23 

C.  Inspiration  is  both  an  Act  and  a  Result ....  25 

D.  Inspiration  implies  both  Human  and  Divine  Au- 

thorship             ...  26 

E.  Inspiration  distinguished  from  Revelation    ...  36 
E.   Inspiration  distinguished  from  Illumination      .     .  40 

Chapter  III.    Summary  op  the  Principal  Views  now 

Prevalent 44- 

A.  Mechanical  Inspiration 44 

B.  Partial  Inspiration 48 

C.  Different  Degrees  of  Inspiration 52 

D.  Natural  Inspiration 54 

E.  Universal  Inspiration 56 

F.  Plenary  Inspiration 59 


Vlll  CONTENTS. 

PAGE 

Chapter  IV.    Negative  Statements  of  the  Doctrine  01 

A.  Mode  of  Divine  Influence  not  to  be  explained  .     .  61 

B.  Inspiration  not  Mechanical 63 

C.  Not  Destructive  of  Consciousness,  Self-control,  or 

Individuality 68 

D.  Not  mere  Elevation  of  Natural  Faculties     ...  69 

E.  Did  not  imply  Perfect  Knowledge  on  all  Subjects  78 
E.   Did  not  imply  Exemption  from  Error  in  Conduct 

or  Great  Piety 81 

G.   Did  not  prevent  Errors  of  Subsequent  Transcrip- 
tion       82 

H.   Does  not  imply  the  Truth  of  Opinions  or  Sayings 

stated  in  Scripture,  but  not  sanctioned    ...  84 
I.   Does  not  imply  the  Propriety  of  Actions  recorded, 

but  not  approved 88 

Chapter  V.    Positive  Statement  of  the  Doctrine  .  90 

1.  The  Bible  the  Word  of  God 90 

2.  The  Bible  the  Production  of  Men 90 

3.  This  Twofold  Authorship  extends  to  every  Part 

of  Scripture 90 


Part  Secontr* 

PROOFS  OF  INSPIRATION. 

Chapter  I.    Presumptive  Argument  for  Inspiration  93 

1.  Nature  of  God  and  Man 93 

2.  Permanence  and  Importance  of  the  Object  in  View  94 

3.  Other  Supernatural  Acts  in  giving  the  Scriptures  95 

4.  Character  and  Circumstances  of  the  Writers     .     .  97 

Chapter  II.    What  Direct  Evidence  of  Inspiration 

IS   TO   BE   expected 104 

1.  The  Proper  Source  of  such  Evidence 104 

2.  The  Form  in  which  this  Evidence  is  given    .     .     .  109 


CONTENTS.  IX 

FAOB 

Chapteb  III.     DiKECT  Proofs  or  Inspiration    .     .     .  llJi 

1.  The    General    Manner    of  quoting    Scripture    in 

Scripture 114 

2.  Passages  implying  tlie  Inspiration  of  the  Bible  as 

a  Whole    .' 130 

3.  Declarations  of  the  Inspiration  of  Particular  Per- 

sons or  Passages 142 

4.  Promises  of  Inspiration  to  the  Sacred  Writers  .     .  145 

A.  To  Old  Testament  Writers 145 

B.  To  New  Testament  Writers 148 

5.  Assertions  of  Inspiration  by  the  Writers  themselves  158 

6.  Passages  recognizing  the   Union  of  Human  and 

Divine  Authorship 168 


OBJECTIONS  TO  INSPIRATION. 

Chapter  I.    Objections  from  Scripture 179 

Luke  i.  3 179 

1  Corinthians  vii.  6-25 181 

Romans  vi.  18,  19 187 

■2  Corinthians  xi.  17 187 

2  Corinthians  xii.  2,  3  .     . 190 

1  Corinthians  i.  16 191 

Chapter   II.   Objection  from  the  Existence  of  Dif- 
ficulties       192 

Chapter  III.   Objections   from  Alleged   Discrepan- 
cies OR  Mistakes 195 

1.  General  Suggestions 195 

2.  Remarks  on  Some  of  the  Discrepancies  ....  201 


X  CONTENTS. 

FAGB 

Cha-PTEe  IV.    Objections  on  Moral  Grounds  .    .    .    205 

1.  Particular  Actions  objected  to 205 

2.  General  Moral  Objections 207 

3.  Moral  Grandeur  of  the  Biblical  Ethics     ....     215 


Chapter  V.    Objections  on  Critical  Grounds  .    .    .  218 

1.  Objections  from  Text  Criticism 219 

2.  Objections  from  Higher  Criticism 228 

Chapter  VI.    Objections  on  Scientlfic  Grounds     .  235 

Chapter  VII.    Objection  from  Insignificant  Details  251 

CONCLUSION 257 

INDEXES 259 


THE   DOCTRINE   OF   INSPIRATION. 


part  JFtrsit* 

THE  DOCTRINE  OF  INSPIRATION. 


CHAPTER  I. 

PRELIMINARY. 

A.    The  Importance  of  the  Subject. 

THE  importance  of  the  Doctrine  of  Inspiration 
needs  scarcely  any  elaborate  comment  or 
proof.  The  theological  atmosphere  is  full  of  discus- 
sion on  the  subject,  either  directly  or  indirectly. 

Christianity  is  the  Religion  of  the  Book.  It  is 
not  an  external  organization,  nor  a  system  of  cere- 
monies, nor  a  philosophy,  nor  a  vague  inquiry  and 
aspiration,  nor  a  human  invention  for  man's  own 
convenience  or  advantage.  It  is  a  definite  system 
divinely  given,  consisting  primarily  of 

Facts,  occurring  both  on  earth  and  in  heaven  ; 

Doctrines  in  connection  with  those  facts  ; 

Commands  growing  out  of  both  these  ;  and 

Promises  based  upon  them. 

The  history  is  so  interwoven  with  the  doctrinal 
teachings,  the  precepts  so  combined  with  the  prom- 


14  BIBLE   DOCTRINE   OF  INSPIRATION. 

ises,  as  to  be  inseparable  ;  and  the  whole  is  con- 
tained in  the  volume  or  collection  of  writings  which 
we  call  the  Bible. 

The  question,  therefore, 

Is  THE  Bible  the  Word  op  God  ? 

is  of  the  highest  importance  to  us  as  Christians,  as 
theological  students,  as  ministers,  for  all  our  work 
and  life,  in  our  present  and  in  our  future  labors. 

Evangelical  Christians  generally  have  recognized 
this  as  a  vital  question.  "  The  Bible,  the  Bible 
only,  the  religion  of  Protestants,"  has  resounded 
through  many  a  hall  of  discussion  as  the  watch- 
word of  victory,  and  has  been  re-echoed  from  many 
a  pulpit  as  the  battle-cry  of  freedom  from  ecclesias- 
tical domination. 

While  not  ignoring  the  noble  and  animating  his- 
tory of  our  Christian  forefathers,  or  forgetting  the 
testimony  of  all  the  witnesses  for  Jesus  who  have 
lived  and  died,  we  do  not  base  our  own  confidence, 
or  ground  our  appeals  to  others,  on  conformity  to 
any  other  standard  than  the  Word  of  God.  Histor- 
ical associations,  ancient  confessions,  compacts  and 
compromises,  the  opinions  of  good  and  great  men 
within  or  without  the  ranks  of  the  denomination 
to  which  we  belong,  can  have  no  decisive  weight 
with  us.  We  must  go  for  guidance,  not  to  the 
Fathers,  but  to  those  who  were  earlier  and  greater 
than  the  Fathers,  —  to  the  Apostles,  and  above  all 
to  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  Himself. 


PRELIMINARY.  15 

B,     Deficiencies  of  an  Uninspired  Bible. 

The  difference  between  an  inspired  and  an  un- 
inspired Bible  is  of  a  momentous  character.  It  is 
closely  connected  with  the  question  whether  we  are 
following  God  or  men ;  whether  our  religion  is  of 
divine  or  of  human  origin.  An  uninspired  Bible, 
whatever  its  excellences  might  be,  would  have 
three  serious  defects. 

First.  It  would  furnish  no  infallible  standard  of 
truth.  It  would  leave  us  liable  to  all  the  mistakes 
incident  to  failure  of  the  writers,  to  their  errors  in 
judgment,  or  their  defective  expressions  of  correct 
thought.  It  would  furnish  no  principle  of  accurate 
discrimination  between  the  true  and  the  false,  the 
divine  and  the  human.^ 

Second.  It  would  present  no  authoritative  rule 
for  obedience,  and  no  ground  for  confident  and  ever- 
lasting hope.  It  would  contain  advice  instead  of 
commands,  suggestions  instead  of  instructions, 
surmises  of  good  men  (perhaps  not  even  of  good 
men)  instead  of  promises  of  the  faithful  God.  It 
would  give  no  firm  ground  on  which  to  base  our 
convictions,  to  build  our  hopes,  or  to  order  our 
life. 

^  The  existence  or  not  of  an  infallible  standard  of  right  and 
truth  is  a  difference  of  kind,  and  not  of  degree,  and  therefore  a 
fundamental  difference.  The  more  or  the  less  of  human  error, 
the  greater  or  less  degree  of  man's  fallibility,  is  a  difference  that 
sinks  into  unimportance  in  comparison  with  it.  —  Bannermax, 
p.  104. 


16  BIBLE   DOCTRINE   OF  INSPIRATION. 

Third.  It  would  offer  no  suitable  means  for 
testing  and  cultivating  the  docile  spirit,  for  draw- 
ing man's  soul  trustfully  and  lovingly  upward  to  its 
Heavenly  Father.  It  would  minister  to  the  pride 
of  reason,  instead  of  to  the  culture  of  faith.  It 
would  generate  perplexity  instead  of  repose,  con- 
flict instead  of  submission,  resistance  instead  of 
reverence.^ 

— '  Yet  we  must  guard  against  extravagance  of 
statement,  even  here.  Inspiration  is  not  essential, 
as  seems  sometimes  to  have  been  stated  or  implied, 
to  the  historical  credibility  of  Scripture.  The  facts 
there  recorded  would  be  true  and  immensely  im- 
portant, even  though  the  record  of  them  were  not 
inspired.  The  facts  given  are  amply  established 
on  historical  grounds,  and  are  sufficient,  if  admit- 
ted, to  condemn  those  who  reject  the  Bible  ;  indeed, 

1  He  comes  to  the  Bible,  and  sits  over  its  contents  in  the  atti- 
tude of  a  judge  who  is  to  decide  for  himself  what  in  it  is  true  and 
worthy  to  be  believed,  and  what  in  it  is  false  and  deserving  to  be 
rejected  ;  not  in  the  attitude  of  the  disciple  who,  within  the  limits 
of  the  inspired  record,  feels  himself  at  Jesus'  feet,  to  receive  every 
word  that  cometh  out  of  his  mouth.  .  .  .  The  assurance  that  the 
Bible  is  the  Word  of  God,  and  not  simply  containing  it,  in  more  or 
less  of  its  human  language,  is  one  fitted  to  solemnise  the  soul  with 
a  holy  fear,  and  a  devout  submission  to  its  declarations  as  the  very 
utterances  of  God.  The  assurance,  on  the  contrary,  that  the  truths 
of  revelation  are  mingled,  in  a  manner  unknown  and  indeterminate, 
with  the  defects  of  the  record,  is  one  which  reverses  the  attitude,  and 
brings  man  as  a  master  to  sit  in  judgment  on  the  Bible  as  summoned 
to  his  bar,  and  bound  to  render  up  to  him  a  confession  of  its  errors, 
and  not  a  declaration  of  its  one  and  authoritative  truth.  — Bannee- 
MA>f,  p.  107.     Compare  pp.  241,  242. 


PRELIMINARY.  17 

those  facts  are  necessary  logically  to  furnish  a 
starting  point  from  which  to  lead  them,  step  by 
step,  into  the  higher  truths.^  Superficial  informa- 
tion about  the  Scripture  is  better  than  entire  igno- 
rance, and  a  general  confidence  that  it  contains  the 
Word  of  God  is  better  than  rejection,  though  not 
equal  to  the  assurance  that  it  is  the  Word  of  God. 
But  for  those  who  are  set  for  the  defence  of  the 
Gospel,  it  is  important  to  recognize  it  to  be  just 
what  it  is,  and  what  God  meant  it  should  be. 
Ministers  especially,  therefore,  should  not  be  con- 
tent with  any  half-way  ground,  or  rest  satisfied  in 
unsettled  views.  They  should  search  thoroughly 
until  they  have  reached  a  reliable  conclusion.  We 
can  sympathize  with  and  understand  honest  doubt, 
especially  in  young  men  assailed  on  every  side  by 
a  multitude  of  conflicting  opinions,  and  by  the  con- 
fident claims  of  the  apostles  of  unbelief.  But  we 
should  not,  we  cannot,  abide  in  doubts.  They  par- 
alyze the  energies,  they  destroy  our  happiness,  they 
hinder  our  usefulness.  The  truth  can  be  ascer- 
tained, and  the  sooner  the  better.  Meanwhile  let 
us  preach  what  we  know,  not  what  we  do  not  know. 

1  If  on  simple  historical  testimony  it  can  be  proved  that  Jesus 
wrought  miracles,  uttered  prophecies,  and  proclaimed  his  divinity, 
—  if  it  can  be  shown  that  he  was  crucified  to  redeem  sinners,  that 
he  rose  again  from  the  dead,  and  that  he  made  the  destiny  of  men 
to  hinge  on  their  acceptance  of  him  as  their  Saviour,  — •  then, 
•whether  the  records  which  contain  those  truths  be  inspired  or  not, 
woe  unto  him  who  neglects  so  great  salvation  !  —  F.  L.  Patton  on 
Inspiration,  p.  23. 

2 


18  BIBLE  DOCTRINE  OF  INSriRATION. 

"  If  you  know  anything,  tell  me  that,"  said  a  great 
philosoi)hcr.  "  Keep  your  doubts  to  yourself.  I 
have  enough  of  my  own." 

C.     Some  Sources  of  Misapprehension. 

All  professed  Christians  agree  in  acknowledging 
in  general  that  the  Bible  is  "  from  God,"  and  that 
it  is  inspired  in  some  sense,  and  to  some  degree. 
But  it  cannot  be  concealed  that  great  differences 
of  opinion  often  take  refuge  under  this  ambiguous 
phraseology.  It  is  of  extreme  importance,  espe- 
cially for  ministers  and  teachers  of  God's  Word,  to 
have  clear  views  and  correct  views  of  this  sul)ject. 
Inspiration  has  become  the  central  topic  of  some 
of  the  great  and  burning  controversies  of  the  age. 
Doubts  concerning  it  are  widely  felt,  and  are  ap- 
parently spreading.  These  doubts  originate,  I  will 
not  say  altogether,  but  certainly  in  large  measure, 
in  the  following  sources  : 

a.  In  misconceptions,  either  of  the  doctrine  it- 
self as  generally  held  by  Evangelical  Christians, 
or  of  the  evidences  and  arguments  by  which  it  is 
supported ; 

h.  In  presuppositions  and  assumptions  hostile  to 
any  supernatural  fact,  and  therefore  to  any  per- 
sonal, divine  communication ; 

c.  In  faulty  interpretation  of  particular  passages 
of  the  Bible,  bearing  on  the  question. 

An  unwary  advocate,  with  more  zeal  than  knowl- 
edge, may  honestly  assume  an  indefensible  position ; 


PRELIMINARY.  19 

and  when  driven  from  that  may,  in  his  panic,  find 
no  secure  stopping-place.  Or,  on  the  other  hand,  a 
kind-hearted,  liberal  man,  in  striving  to  propitiate 
opponents,  and  to  gain  them  over  by  making  a 
specially  mild  and  unobjectionable  statement  of 
truth,  may  unconsciously  surrender  the  very  citadel 
to  the  enemy. 


CHAPTER  II. 
DISTINCTIONS  TO  BE  NOTICED. 

A.    Inspiration  distinguished  from  Kindred  Topics. 

THE  question  before  us  is  simply,  In  what 
sense  is  the  Bible  the  Word  of  God  ?  Is 
it  strictly  theopneustos,  divinely  breathed,  or  not? 
And  if  so,  what  does  that  expression  imply  ? 

The  subject  of  Inspiration  needs  to  be  distin- 
guished from  certain  kindred  topics  of  great  im- 
portance. It  has  complexity  and  extent  enough  of 
its  own,  without  borrowing  burdens  from  correlated 
subjects  of  investigation.  But  many  students  of 
the  subject  are  unwarily  misled  by  writers  who 
create  confusion  in  a  bewildering  display  of  their 
own  learning,  and  who  blend  in  inextricable  dis- 
order topics,  each  of  which  demands  separate  and 
elaborate  study.  The  attempt  is  sometimes  made 
to  embrace  at  one  view,  in  a  brief  discussion,  all 
the  manifold  questions  which  arise  in  the  -study  of 
the  Canon,  of  Text  Criticism,  Higher  Criticism, 
Hermeneutics,  Biblical  History,  and  its  connec- 
tion with  Secular  History.  One  hurried  glance  is 
given  at  all  these  subjects ;  and  of  course  the  only 
result  is  either  the  confidence  of  a  shallow  dogma- 


PISTINCTIONS   TO  BE  NOTICED.  21 

tism,  which  experience  shows  may  be  found  in  the 
blind  following  of  some  Rationalist,  as  well  as  in 
adhering  to  Tradition ;  or  else  there  is  a  vague  im- 
pression of  extreme  mistiness  and  uncertainty.  Let 
us  name  some  of  these  subjects  which  demand  and 
deserve  distinct  study,  though  often  confounded 
with  other  topics,  so  as  to  complicate  the  discussion 
as  to  Inspiration. 

a.  The  Genuineness  of  the  Scriptures.  —  In  this 
the  question  is  one  of  authorship ;  whether  the  vari- 
ous books  that  make  up  the  Bible  were  composed  by 
the  men  claimed  to  be  their  authors  ;  or,  in  those 
cases  where  no  particular  author  is  named,  whether 
they  originated  at  the  time  and  in  the  circumstances 
alleged. 

b.  In  Text  Criticism,  or  Integrity  of  the  Scrip- 
tures, the  question  is  whether  the  books  that  we 
have  are  the  same  as  the  original;  whether  they 
liave  been  correctly  transcribed  and  faithfully  pre- 
served without  material  addition  or  diminution. 

c.  Higher  Criticism  is  the  name  given  of  late 
to  inquiries  depending  on  style,  on  the  mode  of 
thought  and  expression  of  different  writers,  on  the 
vocabulary,  and  tone  employed,  and  various  inter- 
nal peculiarities,  by  which  the  age  and  circumstan- 
ces and  method  of  composition  may  be  discovered. 
Of  course  these  conclusions  bear  more  or  less 
directly  on  the  authorship,  and  so  are  connected 
with  the  topic  first  named  (Genuineness),  but  may 
extend  beyond  that  question. 


22  BIBLE  DOCTRINE  OF  INSPIRATION. 

d.  Authenticity  of  the  Scriptures  (sometimes 
styled  Credibility),  or  the  historical  verity  of  the 
facts  recorded.  In  that  part  of  the  subject  the 
iiKjuiry  is,  Did  those  events  really  occur,  were  those 
discourses  delivered,  were  those  miracles  performed 
as  stated  ?  Is  the  Bible  narrative  a  collection  of 
myths,  or  legends,  or  deliberate  fictions  ;  or  is  it 
mainly  history,  with  some  intermixture  of  exagger- 
ations and  fables ;  or  is  it  throughout  a  statement 
of  facts? 

e.  The  Canon  of  Scripture,  or  the  question  what 
books  constitute  the  inspired  volume.  On  the  one 
side,  some  deny  the  authority  of  certain  books  com- 
monly received,  as  Canticles  and  Esther,  or  He- 
brews, James,  and  the  Revelation.  On  the  other, 
some,  as  the  Romanists,  affirm  the  divine  authority 
of  certain  books  known  as  the  Apocrypha,  such  as 
Maccabees,  Tobit,  etc.  Here  the  issue  is  not  as  to 
the  nature  of  inspiration,  but  as  to  the  claim  that 
particular  books  have  to  be  counted  in  the  number 
of  the  inspired  books. 

f.  The  Rule  of  Faith,  or  the  sufficiency  of  the 
Scriptures.  The  Rationalists  claim  that  reason  is 
the  rule  or  standard  of  belief,  either  alone,  or  supe- 
rior to  or  conjointly  with  the  Bible  ;  while  Ro- 
manists and  other  Traditionalists  affirm  that  the 
Church  is  inspired  as  well  as  the  Bible,  and  its  voice 
is  the  voice  of  God.  Theoretically  they  allege  it  as 
only  co-ordinate  with  the  Bible,  but  practically  they 
establish  it  as  supreme  above  the  Bible ;  and  along 


DISTINCTIONS   TO   BE  NOTICED.  23 

with  this  they  make  the  tacit  assumption  that  they 
and  those  who  agree  with  them  are  the  Church, 
and  they  alone.  Though  admitting  an  infallible 
Bible,  they  put  the  supposed  infallible  interpreter 
in  its  place.  Thus,  as  so  often  happens,  extremes 
meet.  Rationalism  and  Ecclcsiasticism,  diverging 
from  the  truth,  run  round  the  circle  till  they  agree 
in  establishing  themselves  as  the  sovereign  arbiter ; 
the  one  class  accepting  as  true  in  the  Bible  only 
what  "  finds  them,"  that  is,  suits  tliem ;  the  other 
making  the  Church  —  that  is,  the  Hierarchy,  that  is, 
tliemselves  and  their  allies  — the  vicegerent  of  the 
Almighty,  the  custodian  of  truth  and  of  salvation. 

g.  The  Evidences  of  Christianity,  or  the  manifold 
proofs  by  which  the  Christian  system  as  a  whole  is 
shown  to  be  true  and  divine. 

While  all  these  topics  are  interwoven  naturally 
with  the  subject  before  us,  they  are  distinct  from 
it.  And  it  will  conduce  both  to  brevity  and  to 
fairness  and  clearness  of  discussion,  to  keep  them 
apart,  and  to  confine  ourselves  now  to  the  topic  in 
hand. 

B.     Inspiration  implies  real  Supernatural 
Interposition. 

For  the  last  hundred  years  there  has  been  a 
growing  tendency  against  the  admission  of  any- 
thing supernatural.  The  sophisms  of  Hume  had 
a  wide  influence,  carrying  out  some  unwarranted 
inferences  from  Locke's  philosophy,  and  misusing 


24  BIBLE   DOCTRINE   OF  INSPIRATION. 

certain  of  the  metaphysical  subtleties  of  the  Scofc- 
tisli  school ;  afterwards  the  Transcendental  philoso- 
phy of  Germany,  the  bold  pretensions  of  Positivism, 
and  the  shadowy  theories  of  Pantheism,  all  tended 
to  furnish  avenues  of  escape,  for  those  who  wished 
them,  from  the  idea  of  a  living,  personal,  omnipo- 
tent God,  who  interposes  freely  and  effectively  in 
human  affairs. 

A  more  powerful  stimulus,  however,  has  been 
given  to  the  prevalence  of  tliese  anti-supernatural 
notions,  by  the  proneness  of  many  students  of 
physical  science  to  apply  their  favorite  methods  of 
investigation  to  topics  outside  of  their  range,  and 
to  carry  the  assumptions  which  seem  to  be  just  in 
dealing  with  material  phenomena  into  the  domain 
of  theology.  Because  they  find,  everywhere  in  the 
visible  universe,  law,  order,  universal  principles, 
they  have  undertaken  to  dethrone  the  Lawgiver, 
and  to  exalt  on  his  throne,  in  His  place.  Law  itself. 
They  deny  that  the  Supreme  Being  can  interpose 
in  any  way  save  that  which  they  have  ascertained, 
or  are  willing  to  allow,  that  he  has  heretofore  done. 
And  hence  they  deny  that  He  can  work  a  miracle. 

Some  true  Christians  have  yielded  to  the  force 
of  this  current,  either  unreflectingly,  or  with  some 
vague  idea  of  a  compromise,  by  which  they  would 
gain  the  support  of  men  of  science  for  religion  ;  and, 
without  exactly  denying  miracles,  have  set  them- 
selves to  pare  down  within  credible  limits  the  won- 
ders recorded  in  the  Bible.    They  will  nibble  away 


DISTINCTIONS   TO   BE  NOTICED.  25 

at  the  edge  of  a  miracle,  chip  off  a  little  here  and  a 
little  there,  and  seem  to  imagine  that  thej  have  re- 
moved the  difficulty  by  reducing  its  size  or  changing 
its  form.  Let  us  not  be  afraid  of  admitting  the  idea 
and  the  fact  of  a  miracle.  The  whole  system  of 
Christianity  is  a  stupendous  series  of  miracles. 

With  those  who  deny  this  we  are  not  now  deal- 
ing. For  them  the  question  is  not  about  Inspira- 
tion, but  about  the  Existence,  or  else  about  the 
Providence,  of  God.  The  present  discussion  is 
designed  for  those  who  admit  that  there  is  a  God, 
that  he  has  communicated  with  men,  and  that  the 
Bible  is  in  some  degree  or  extent  his  message. 

C.   Inspiration  may  be  regarded  as  an  Act,  or  as  a  Result. 

It  is  an  influence  proceeding  from  God,  and  ter- 
minating in  certain  effects.  These  effects  may  be 
affirmed  of  the  men  who  wrote  and  spoke,  or  of  the 
books  written.  Both  may  be  properly  said  to  be 
inspired.  Originally  it  was  a  question  as  to  the 
men.  Practically  for  us  now  the  question  is  as  to 
the  books.  Are  they  a  message  from  God  ?  If  so, 
in  what  sense,  and  to  what  degree  ? 

There  are  some  who  conceive  that  the  subject  is 
cleared  of  difficulty  by  limiting  the  inspiration  to 
the  writings.  The  men  were  not  inspired,  they 
say,  but  only  their  writings  ;  not  all  they  said  or 
wrote,  but  just  these  writings.  So  Paul  was  not 
inspired,  but  the  letters  to  the  Ephesians  and  Ro- 
mans were.    It  will  be  shown  hereafter  that  not  all 


26  BIBLE   DOCTRINE   OF   INSPIRATION. 

the  utterances  or  Avritings,  not  all  the  opinions  or 
conduct,  of  the  sacred  writers  are  divinely  sanc- 
tioned, but  only  their  official  utterances,  their 
teachings  and  directions.  Inspiration  was  not  a 
personal  and  inseparable  characteristic,  attaching 
to  everything  they  did  or  thought,  but  it  was  a 
divine  gift,  imparted  for  a  sp<3cial  purpose;  and 
tliere  is  no  proof  of  its  extending  beyond  the  pur- 
pose for  which  it  was  given, — that  of  making  them 
the  accurate  and  authoritative  messengers  of  God's 
will  and  truth  to  men.  Still,  in  inspiring  the  rec- 
ord, it  pleased  God  to  inspire  the  men  to  record  or 
utter  it.  And  there  is  nothing  ultimately  gained, 
either  to  clearness  of  understanding  or  facility  of 
proof,  by  attempting  to  omit  the  human  link  of  the 
chain  through  which  the  influence  passed.  The 
Scriptures  were  inspired  ;  the  men  of  God  who 
wrote  them  were  inspired  too,  moved,  home  along^ 
by  the  Holy  Spirit. 

D.    Inspiration  implies  both  Divine  and  Human 
Authorship. 

The  distinction  between  the  divine  and  the  hu- 
man authorship  of  the  sacred  writings  is  not  to  be 
denied  in  thought,  nor  ignored  in  our  reasonings. 
But  it  is  of  still  greater  importance  to  recognize 
that  both  must  be  distinctly  held  by  the  advocates 
of  a  true  inspiration. 

A  document  or  law  might  be  so  given  from  God 
as  altogether  to  exclude  human  authorship,  or  the 


DISTINCTIONS  TO  BE  NOTICED.  27 

intervention  of  any  human  medium ;  and  then, 
though  divine,  it  would  not  be  inspired.  Such  was 
the  Decalogue  as  originally  given.  The  words 
were  uttered  by  the  Divine  Voice  on  Sinai,  in  the 
hearing  of  Moses  as  well  as  of  the  people ;  and 
he,  as  well  as  they,  did  "  exceedingly  fear  and 
quake."  (Exodus  xx.  19-22  ;  Hebrews  xii.  21.) 
They  were  then  recorded  by  the  finger  of  God 
upon  tablets  prepared  by  God.  (Exodus  xxxii.  16. 
Compare  xxxiv.  1,  28.)  The  subsequent  record 
of  them  by  Moses  was  inspired. 

The  divine  origin  and  authority  of  the  Word  is 
not  to  be  affirmed,  so  as  to  exclude  or  impair  the 
reality  of  the  human  authorship,  and  the  peculiari- 
ties resulting  therefrom.  The  Bible  is  God's  Word 
to  man,  throughout ;  yet  at  the  same  time  it  is 
really  and  thoroughly  man's  composition.  No  at- 
tempt should  be  made  —  and  we  shall  certainly 
make  none — to  thrust  aside  or  ignore  the  "human 
element"  of  the  Scriptures,. which  is  unmistakably 
apparent  on  their  very  face ;  no  one  should  wish  so  to 
magnify  the  divine  as  to  crowd  this  out,  or  almost 
out.  Tliis  is  one  of  the  mistakes  which  good  men 
have  committed.  Let  both  be  admitted,  recognized, 
accepted,  thankfully  and  rejoicingly,  each  contribut- 
ing to  make  the  Bible  more  completely  adapted  to 
human  needs,  as  the  instrument  of  divine  grace,  and 
tlie  guide  for  weak  and  wandering  human  souls. 

The  Word  is  not  of  man,  as  to  its  source  ;  nor 
depending  on  man,  as  to  its  authority.     It  is  by 


28  BIBLE  DOCTRINE  OF   INSPIRATION. 

and  through  man  as  its  medium ;  yet  not  simply  as 
the  channel  along  which  it  runs,  like  water  through 
a  lifeless  pipe,  but  through  and  by  man  as  the 
agent  voluntarily  active  and  intelligent  in  its  com- 
munication. Both  sides  of  the  truth  are  expressed 
in  the  Scriptural  language :  "  Holy  men  spake 
as  they  were  moved  [borne  along]  by  the  Holy 
Spirit."  (2  Peter  i.  21.)  The  men  spoke;  the 
impulse  and  direction  were  from  God. 

Theories  have  been  devised,  proceeding  on  vari- 
ous human  analogies,  and  limiting  the  divine  oper- 
ation to  make  room  for  the  human,  or  suspending 
the  human  to  allow  the  intervention  of  the  divine. 
There  is  a  strong  temptation  to  adopt  such  sugges- 
tions. It  simplifies  the  matter  so.  If  the  book 
were  human  only,  a  collection  of  the  thoughts, 
hopes,  desires,  guesses  at  truth,  of  certain  wise 
men  of  ancient  times,  that  would  be  an  entirely 
intelligible  supposition.  If  it  were  divine  only,  as 
the  tables  of  stone,  engraved  by  the  finger  of  God, 
that  would  be  a  perfectly  simple  proposition.  If  it 
were  of  twofold,  independent  authbrship,  part  by 
God  and  another  part  by  man,  the  divinity  con- 
tributing one  portion  and  then  retiring,  while  the 
human  author  acts  alone,  there  would  be  perhaps 
no  objection  on  the  part  of  modern  theorizers  to 
recognize  such  an  intermixture,  and  at  any  rate  all 
would  be  intelligible  enough ;  though  there  would 
be  serious  difficulty  in  determining  which  part  was 
from  above,  and  which  of  the  earth,  earthy. 


DISTINCTIONS  TO  BE  NOTICED.  29 

But  neither  of  these  suggestions  suits  the  actual 
phenomena.  The  Bible  will  not  submit  to  lie  upon 
this  bed  of  Procrustes,  to  be  crammed  and  crowded 
into  these  moulds  of  human  theories.  It  is  all 
unmistakably  the  work  of  man.  It  is  all  by  singu- 
lar and  accumulated  evidences  declared  to  be  the 
Word  of  God ;  all  writteu  by  man,  all  inspired  by 
God.  Both  points  are  proved  by  separate  and  suf- 
ficient evidence.  If  we  undertake  to  go  beyond, 
and  to  explain  how  this  was  accomplished,  we  leave 
what  has  been  made  known  to  us  for  .the  barren 
and  uncertain  fields  of  conjecture. 

This  full  recognition  of  the  human  authorship  of 
the  Scriptures  is  of  prime  importance ;  for  much  of 
the  force  of  the  argument  against  a  strict  doctrine 
of  Inspiration  consists  in  proving  this  human  au- 
thorship of  the  sacred  writings,  which  we  think  is 
undeniable,  and  then  inferring  from  that  their  fal- 
libility. "  Human,  therefore  fallible,"  they  say  ; 
"  fallible,  therefore  false  in  some  measure."  ^  But 
this  favorite  line  of  argument  seems  to  us  to  be 
more  plausible  than  powerful.     It  is  a  mere  assump- 

1  Falsehood  was  no  part  of  man's  original  nature;  and  the  pres- 
ence of  error  was  not  essential  to  themselves  being  men,  or  to  their 
writings  being  human  writings.  On  the  contrary,  in  being  pro- 
tected from  liability  to  error,  and  exalted  above  the  power  of  un- 
truth, they  were  but  restored  in  the  hour  of  inspiration,  in  so  far, 
to  that  condition  of  freedom  from  evil  in  which  they  were  created 
in  the  beginning.  .  .  .  They  were  lifted  up  into  a  condition  more 
appropriate  to  human  nature,  as  it  was  designed  and  at  hrst  made 
to  be,  than  any  in  which  it  would  have  been  possible  for  them  to 
have  uttered  or  recorded  error.  — Bannerman,  p.  436. 


30  BIBLE   DOCTRINE   OF  INSPIRATION. 

tion  that  their  being  human  forbids  their  being  also 
divine ;  that  God  cannot  so  inspire  and  use  a  hu- 
man being  as  to  keep  his  message  free  from  error ; 
that  the  human  origin,  under  divine  control,  neces- 
sarily involves  either  falsity  or  fallibility.  This 
seems  to  be  perfectly  plain  :  yet  this  fallacy  un- 
derlies whole  pages  of  vigorous  denunciation  and 
confident  appeal.^ 

Such  a  double  authorship,  as  we  are  led  by  tlie 
evidence  (hereafter  to  be  submitted)  to  attribute 
to  the  Bible,  is  a  thing  utterly  unknown  in  any 
other  book. 

A  human  volume  might  be  the  joint  composition 
of  two  writers,  one  preparing  one  part,  and  the 
other  the  remainder  ;  or  one  suggesting  the  idcns, 
the  other  clothing  them  in  the  language  finally 
adopted  ;  or  one  writing  originally,  the  other  edit- 
ing, enlarging,  correcting;  or  each  doing  this  re- 
vision of  the  work  of  the  other.     But  nothing  like 

1  The  doctrine  of  the  plenary  inspiration  of  the  Bible,  which 
regards  it  as  all  in  one  sense  man's,  and  all  in  another  sense  God's, 
is  the  only  view  that  gives  full  place  to  the  hitman  element  in 
Scripture,  all  theories  except  itself  more  or  less  putting  aside  or 
impairing  its  perfection.  Other  views,  such  as  that  of  an  inspira- 
tion different  in  degree  or  kind  as  respects  different  truths  or  por- 
tions of  Scripture,  make  the  sacred  volume  to  be,  in  some  of  its 
passages  or  statements,  no  more  than  partly  human,  just  as  they 
make  it  in  others  to  be  no  more  than  partly  divine.  .  .  .  Unless 
we  are  prepared  to  adopt  the  theory  that  the  Bible  is  nothing  but 
the  composition  of  man,  alone  and  exclusively,  there  is  no  other 
view  except  that  of  a  plenary  inspiration  which  conserves  equally 
the  divine  and  the  human  element  in  the  recorded  word.  —  Ban- 
NERMAN,  pp.  446,  447. 


DISTINCTIONS   TO  BE  NOTICED.  31 

either  of  these  is  supposed  or  affirmed  as  to  the 
divine  and  the  human  authorship  of  the  Bible. 

If  it  is  objected  that  we  cannot  understand  how 
this  human  and  divine  authorship  was  exercised, 
so  that  the  two  elements  sliould  be  consistent  with 
each  other,  and  that  we  cannot  believe  what  we 
cannot  understand,  we  reply, — 

1.  That,  if  the  two  things  affirmed  were  plainly 
incompatible  with  each  other,  logical  contradic- 
tions, so  that  their  union  is  inconceivable  and  im- 
possible, the  objection  would  have  decisive  weight. 

2.  But  suppose  that  they  are  rather  of  such  a  na- 
ture that,  while  the  combination  is,  from  the  nature 
of  the  case,  not  within  our  experience,  and  so  it  is  not 
within  our  power  to  comprehend  and  explain  their 
union,  it  is  not  beyond  the  power  of  God  to  effect 
it.  The  case  then  presents  a  very  different  aspect, 
analogous  to  many  others,  where  we  are  compelled 
to  admit  the  facts,  while  we  are  utterly  unable  to 
explain  them.  That  they  are,  we  know  ;  how  they 
are,  we  know  not.  As  it  has  been  often  and  justly 
said,  a  man  who  refuses  to  believe  anything  that  he 
does  not  understand  will  have  a  very  short  creed. 

We  recur,  then,  to  the  statement  that  the  Bible 
is  throughout  divine  and  human,  all  inspired  by 
God,  all  written  by  man. 

This  is  the  current  doctrine  of  Christian  people, 
as  set  forth  substantially  by  the  great  body  of 
thoughtful  and  trusted  expounders,  of  different 
denominations  and  of  various  shades  of   opinion, 


32  BIBLE   DOCTRINE   OF  INSPIRATION. 

with  some  variations  of  language  indeed,  but  with 
great  general  accord. 

It  is  not  fair  to  confound  or  identify  this  strict 
doctrine  of  Inspiration  with  the  so-called  "  Post- 
Reformation  dogma"  ,of  mechanical  inspiration, 
which  (as  we  think)  is  not  properly  inspiration  ; 
and  to  sharpen  the  arguments  directed  against 
the  current  view  by  invectives  at  what  some  are 
pleased  to  style  the  traditional,  uncritical,  mon- 
strous ideas  of  the  advocates  of  Plenary  or  Verbal 
Inspiration.  Some  of  them  have  undoubtedly  been 
incautious  in  statement,  or  heated  in  discussion, 
and  we  need  not  attempt  their  vindication.  But 
that  does  not  impair  their  substantial  agreement  in 
the  doctrine  as  here  stated. 

A  few  quotations  from  some  leading  authors 
may  suffice  on  this  point.  It  is  not  claimed  that 
all  the  writers  quoted  would  accept  the  views  ad- 
vocated by  us  in  all  their  minutiae,  but  as  to  the 
point  now  under  discussion  their  statements  are 
in  thorough  accord,  and  of  great  weight. 

Philip  Schafp  {Preshyteriaii) .  The  New  Testa- 
ment presents  in  its  way  the  same  union  of  the  divine 
and  human  natures  as  the  person  of  Christ.  .  .  .  The 
Bible  is  thoroughly  human,  though  without  error,  in 
contents  and  form,  in  the  mode  of  its  rise,  its  compi- 
lation, its  preservation  and  transmission ;  yet  at  the 
same  time  thoroughly  divine,  both  in  its  thoughts  and 
Avords,  in  its  origin,  vitality,  energy,  and  effect. — 
History  of  the  Christian  Church,  Vol.  I.  p.  93. 


DISTINCTIONS   TO   BE   NOTICED.  83 

B.  K.  Peirce  {Methodist).  The  Bible  is  not  a 
specimen  of  the  style  of  the  Holy  Spirit  as  a  writer ; 
but  the  different  authors  expressed  in  their  own  lan- 
guage, and  by  their  own  illustrations,  the  ideas  poured 
into  their  minds  from  on  high.  .  .  .  The  Son  of  man 
was  no  less  a  perfect  man,  hungering,  thirsting,  sleep- 
ing, weeping,  because  he  was  the  Son  of  God ;  and  the 
Bible,  with  all  its  marks  of  human  hands  and  weak- 
ness, is  none  the  less  a  revelation  of  the  word  and  will 
of  God.  —  The  Word  of  God  Opened,  pp.  23,  24. 

B.  F.  Westcott  (Episcopalian).  The  human  pow- 
ers of  the  divine  messenger  act  according  to  their  nat- 
ural powers,  even  when  these  laws  are  supernaturally 
strengthened.  Man  is  not  converted  into  a  machine, 
even  in  the  hand  of  God.  .  .  .  The  nature  of  man  is 
not  neutralized  by  the  divine  agency,  and  the  truth  of 
God  is  not  impaired,  but  exactly  expressed  in  one  of 
its  several  aspects  to  the  individual  mind.  —  Introduc- 
tion to  the  Study  of  the  Gospels. 

Henry  Alford  (Episcoj)alian).  The  inspiration  of 
the  sacred  writers  I  believe  to  have  consisted  in  the  ful- 
ness of  the  influence  of  the  Holy  Spirit  specially  raising 
them  to  and  enabling  them  for  their  work,  in  a  manner 
which  distinguishes  them  from  all  other  writers  in  the 
world,  and  their  work  from  all  other  works.  The  men 
were  full  of  the  Holy  Ghost :  the  books  are  the  pouring 
out  of  that  fulness  through  the  men,  the  conservation 
of  the  treasure  in  earthen  vessels.  The  treasure  is 
ours  in  all  its  richness ;  but  it  is  ours,  as  only  it  can 
be  ours,  in  the  imperfections  of  human  speech,  in  the 
limitations  of  human  thought,  in  the  variety  incident 
at  first  to  individual  character,  and  then  to  manifold 

3 


34  BIBLE  DOCTRINE  OF  INSPIRATION. 

transcription  and  the  lapse  of  ages.  The  men  were 
inspired,  and  the  books  are  the  result  of  that  inspira- 
tion. —  Prolegomena  to  his  Greek  New  Testament,  p.  21. 

Edwakd  Garbett  {Episcopalian).  If  we  say  that 
the  Bible  is  the  true  word  of  God,  the  terra  "  word  " 
involves  the  human  element,  for  it  denotes  at  once  the 
fact  of  a  communication,  and  the  channel  through 
which  it  is  made.  If  we  say  that  the  Bible  is  God's 
word,  we  express  it  yet  more  distinctly  in  the  further 
term  "written";  written  how  but  in  human  words, 
by  human  hands,  through  human  materials,  and  for 
human  readers  ?  To  talk  of  a  revelation  devoid  of 
a  human  element  is  to  use  words  devoid  of  sense. 
[After  referring  to  the  analogy  of  the  two  natures  in 
the  personal  word  of  God,  he  adds :]  If  we  attempt 
to  confound  the  divine  and  human  element  togetlier, 
and  say  that  the  Scripture  is  neither  human  nor  di- 
vine, but  something  made  up  of  both,  we  are  cor- 
rected by  the  plain  facts  of  the  case ;  for  the  distinct 
human  element  is  palpably  there  in  the  language, 
imagery,  and  style ;  and  the  distinct  divine  element  is 
also  there  in  the  all-pervading  unity  of  design  and 
sublimity  of  subject.  .  .  .  Nor  are  we  any  more  able 
to  separate  the  two  elements  than  we  are  to  confound 
them.  For  if  we  say  that  part  of  the  Scripture  is 
divine  and  part  of  it  human,  we  are  again  contradicted 
by  the  facts  ;  for  in  the  part  we  acknowledge  to  be 
divine,  the  human  element  still  survives.  —  God's 
Word   Written,  pp.  143-145. 

E.  P.  Humphrey  {Presbyterian).  The  subject  may 
be  opened  by  pointing  out  the  two  elements  which 
coexist   in  the   sacred   records,  the   human   and   the 


DISTINCTIONS  TO  BE  NOTICED.  35 

divine.  "Holy  men  of  old  spake," — there  is  the 
human  ;  "as  they  were  moved  by  the  Holy  Ghost,"  — 
there  is  the  divine.  Very  instructive  here  is  the 
resemblance  between  the  combination  of  the  divine 
and  human  in  the  person  of  Christ  and  in  the  Holy 
Scriptures.  Both  are  expressly  called  by  the  sacred 
writers  the  Word  of  God;  the  first  is  the  Word 
incarnate,  the  last  is  the  Word  written.  Again,  the 
manifestation  of  both  proceeded  from  the  Holy 
Ghost;  the  first  by  the  way  of  a  miraculous  concep- 
tion, the  other  by  the  way  of  a  supernatural  inspira- 
tion. Next,  the  Son  of  God  came  down  from  above, 
and  took  upon  him  human  nature ;  even  so  saving 
truth  was  revealed  from  heaven,  and  was  embodied  in 
human  language.  Further,  in  the  one  person  of  our 
Lord  two  whole,  perfect,  and  entire  natures  were  in- 
separably joined  together  in  one  person,  without  con- 
version, composition,  or  confusion ;  in  like  manner 
the  Bible  is  one  book,  only  one,  wherein  the  two  ele- 
ments are  inseparably  combined  in  such  manner  that 
the  divine  does  not  absorb  the  human,  nor  does  the 
human  adulterate  the  divine.  In  Christ  the  two  na- 
tures are  so  related  that  he  is  at  once  the  Son  of  God 
and  the  Son  of  man ;  in  the  Scriptures  the  two  ele- 
ments coexist  in  such  fulness  that  the  whole  book  is 
God's  word,  and  the  whole  is  man's  word.  In  neither 
case  are  we  able  to  explain  the  mode  of  union,  but  we 
are  not  at  liberty  to  solve  the  problem  by  rejecting 
either  of  its  conditions. 

We  should  bear  in  mind,  however,  that  in  Christ 
the  manifestation  of  the  divine  is  personal,  but  in  the 
Bible  it  is  verbal.     Therefore  we  worship  the  incar- 


36  BIBLE  DOCTRINE  OF  INSPIRATION. 

nate  Word  as  God  over  all ;  we  do  not  worship  the 
written  word,  but  we  bow  to  its  authority  as  the  only- 
infallible  rule  of  faith  and  practice.  —  Second  General 
Council  of  the  Fresbi/terlmi  Alliance,  Philadelphia,  1880. 
J.  A.  Smith  {Baptist).  One  of  the  most  beautiful 
and  striking  peculiarities  of  inspired  Scripture  is  the 
presence  there  of  the  various  human  element,  devel- 
oping itself  in  all  varieties  of  character  and  experience, 
and  thus  speaking  to  every  reader  the  vernacular  of 
his  own  heart  and  life.  It  is  a  different  hand,  Ave 
see,  as  well  as  a  different  theme,  when  Moses  lays 
down  the  pen  of  history,  and  David  takes  up  the  harp 
of  song.  When  Jeremiah  mourns,  or  Ezekiel  thun- 
ders from  the  Sinai  of  prophecy,  it  is  not  as  when 
Isaiah  blows  glad  trumpets.  The  beloved  Apostle  is 
known  in  the  very  first  words  he  utters,  while  no  one 
can  mistake  the  profound  and  sententious  Paul.  Each 
writer  is  seen  in  his  own  proper  character,  and  recog- 
nized by  idiosyncrasies  he  is  known  to  have  possessed. 
"  But  the  manifestation  of  the  Spirit  is  given  to  every  " 
one.  The  same  divine  power  pervades  all,  brings  its 
own  gracious  design  out  of  each,  and  gives  us  in  the 
end  a  unity  as  complete  as  the  variety.  —  The  Spirit 
and  the  Word,  pp.  114,  115. 

Quotations  like  these  might  be  indefinitely  mul- 
tiplied. 

Ij.    Inspiration  distinguished  from  Revelation. 

The  supernatural  interposition  by  which  the 
Bible  has  been  given  to  man  implies  two  things,  or 
consists   of  two  divine  operations,  which,  though 


DISTINCTIONS   TO   BE   NOTICED.  87 

usually  concurring,  are  distinguished  in  their  na- 
ture, viz.  : 

Revelation,  which  is  that  direct  divine  influence 
that  imparts  truth  to  the  mind. 

Inspiration,  which  is  that  divine  influence  that 
secures  the  accurate  transference  of  truth  into  hu- 
man language  by  a  speaker  or  writer,  so  as  to  be 
communicated  to  other  men.^ 

1  Other  definitions  of  Inspiration  are  as  follows  :  — 
A.  H.  Si'KONG.  That  special  divine  influence  upon  the  minds  of 
the  Scripture  writers  in  virtue  of  which  their  productions,  apart 
from  errors  of  transcription,  and  when  rightly  interpreted,  together 
constitute  an  infallible  and  sufficient  rule  of  faith  and  practice.  — 
Systematic  Theolocjy,  p.  95. 

E.  A.  Park.  Inspiration  is  such  an  influence  over  the  writers  of 
the  Bible  that  all  their  teachings  which  have  a  religious  character 
are  trustworthy. 

W.  C.  Wilkinson.  Inspiration  is  help  from  God  to  keep  report 
of  divine  revelation  free  from  error.  Help  to  whom  ?  No  matter 
to  whom,  so  the  result  is  secured.  The  final  result,  viz.  the  record 
or  report  of  revelation,  this  must  be  free  from  error.  Inspiration 
may  affect  one  or  all  of  the  agents  employed. 

G.  T.  Ladd.  While  Professor  Ladd  gives  no  formal  definition  of 
Inspiration  that  I  have  observed,  he  states  it  as  an  element  of  the 
conception  of  Sacred  Scripture  held  by  the  Church,  —  that  "Sacred 
Scripture  owes  its  origin  to  that  specific  movement  of  the  Divine 
Spirit  within  the  human  spirit  which  forms  the  nece.ssary  ethical 
condition  of  receiving  and  appropriating  the  truths  of  redemption 
by  all  members  of  the  body  of  believers."  — Doctrine  of  Sacred  Scrip- 
ture, Vol.  II.  p.  271. 

W.  W.  Gardner.  Inspiration  consists  in  that  actuating,  con- 
trolling, and  guiding  influence  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  under  which  God's 
chosen  messengers  spoke  and  wrote  the  original  Scriptures.  —  Gard- 
ner on  Inspiration,  p.  2. 

F.  L.  Patton.  The  books  of  the  Bible  .  .  .  were  composed  by 
men  who  acted  under  the  influence  of  the  Holy  Ghost  to  such  an 
extent  that  they  were  preserved  from  every  error  of  fact,  of  doctrine,      \\\ 


38  BIBLE  DOCTRINE  OF  INSPIRATION. 

These  are  not  the  same,  not  necessarily  united, 
and  ought  not  to  be  confounded.  They  have  often 
been  combuied  in  the  same  person  or  writing. 
They  must  be  combined,  (as  we  think  they  are  in 
the  Bible,)  in  order  to  secure  the  infallible  truth 
and  divine  authority  we  claim  for  it.  But  it  is  im- 
portant to  distinctness  and  accuracy  of  view  to 
discriminate  between  them.  To  illustrate  this  dis- 
tinction, we  may  refer, — 

a.  To  those  multitudes  who  heard  Christ  speak, 
and  thus  received  a  revelation,  or  to  those  who  lis- 
tened to  the  words  uttered  on  Mount  Sinai ;  for 
truth  was  presented  to  them  in  words  by  one  who 
was  God  himself.  But  the  hearers  were  not  there- 
fore inspired  to  record  or  relate  these  words  upon 
divine  authority,  nor  were  they  secured  from  for- 
getfulness  or  error  if  they  attempted  to  make  com- 
munications about  them.  Joseph,  the  husband  of 
Mary,  was  warned  of  God  in  a  dream  as  to  his 
flight  into  Egypt  and  return  to  Galilee ;  but  we  are 
not  informed  that  he  was  inspired  to  record  the 
message. 

h.  Many  inspired  men  wrote  under  inspiration 
things  which  they  knew  without  revelation,  but 
their  record  or  utterance  of  these  things  was 
divinely  controlled.  So  when  Luke  records  the 
letter    of    Claudius    Lysias    (Acts    xxiii.    26-30), 

of  judgment ;  and  these  so  influenced  in  the  choice  of  language  that 
tlie  very  words  tliey  used  were  the  words  of  God.  — Patton  on  In- 
spiratiun,  p.  92. 


DISTIXCTIONS   TO   BE   NOTICED.  39 

probably  transcribing  it,  or  mentions  the  decree  for 
the  enrohnent  of  the  Roman  empire  for  taxation,  or 
when  John  and  Paul  record  what  they  themselves 
said  or  saw,  we  have  no  need  to  assume  revelation 
as  the  source  of  their  knowledge. 

This  distinction  may  enable  us  to  see  more 
clearly  what  the  precise  difference  is  between  the 
strict  and  the  lax  views  of  Inspiration  among  many 
who  are  really  evangelical.  Both  agree  that  Chris- 
tianity is  true,  notwithstanding  all  objections  and 
difficulties.  Both  agree  that  Eevelation  is  super- 
natural, if  given  at  all;  and  that  it  has  been  given; 
and  this  notwithstanding  their  confessed  incapacity 
to  understand  or  explain  liow  it  was  given.  But 
one  class  assume,  or  tend  to  assume,  just  at  this 
point,  that  the  writers  were  left  to  themselves 
mainly  or  altogether  in  recording  what  they  knew. 
They  allege  a  divine  operation  only  in  imparting  to 
them  knowledge  on  certain  subjects ;  while  the 
other  class  affirm  a  divine  influence  over  the 
writers  in  their  giving  forth,  as  well  as  in  receiving 
the  truth.  The  former  admit  revelation  freely,  but 
arc  more  or  less  uncertain  or  hesitating  in  affirm- 
ing inspiration  also.  The  latter  affirm  God's  oper- 
ation in  both.i 

^  Botli  admit  that,  in  a  miraculous  manuei'  unknown  to  us,  the  rev- 
elation from  God  was  conveyed  to  the  mind  of  the  prophet  originally 
in  a  form  of  absolute  purity  and  infallible  truth.  The  point  at  which 
the  divergence  between  the  two  views  begins,  is  after  the  revelation 
was  made  by  God,  and  made  perfectly,  and  when  it  came  to  be  re- 
corded by  man.     According  to  the  views  of  the  advocates  of  plenary 


40  BIBLE   DOCTRINE  OF  INSPIRATION. 

F.     Inspiration  distinguished  from  Illumination. 

It  is  important  also  to  distinguish  both  Revela- 
tion and  Inspiration  from  Spiritual  Illumination, 
such  as  is  common  and  necessary  to  all  Christians. 
This  last  may  be  defined  as  that  influence  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  under  which  all  the  children  of  God 
receive,  discern,  and  feed  upon  the  truth  commu- 
nicated to  them.  This  is  distinct  from  the  influ- 
ences before  named  (revelation  and  inspiration) 
in  several  particulars  :  — 

a.  It  is  promised  to  all  believers,  and  therefore 
is  what  every  Christian  may  expect  and  pray  for. 

h.  It  is  dependent  on  conditions,  which  may  or 
may  not  be  fulfilled  by  the  individual. 

c.  It  admits  of  degrees,  increasing  or  diminish- 
ing in  the  same  person,  and  varying  greatly  as  it  is 
actually  found  in  different  persons. 

d.  It  is  closely  connected  with  personal  char- 
acter. 

e.  It  conduces  to  and  s-ccures  salvation. 
Neither  of  these  five  points  is  true  with  respect 

to  Revelation  or  Inspiration. 

Spiritual  Illumination  is  confounded  with  Inspi- 

irispiration,  the  same  supernatural  power  which  guarded  the  revela- 
tion, in  the  act  of  being  made  to  the  prophet,  from  all  incomplete- 
ness and  mistake,  also  presided  over  the  act  b}'  which  he  recorded 
it  in  the  Bible ;  so  that  the  result  of  this  second  step  in  the  process, 
no  less  than  of  the  first,  was  miraculously  guarded  from  error,  and 
the  product  was  a  record  marked  by  infallible  truth  and  divine 
authority.  —  Bannerman,  p.  98. 


DISTINCTIONS   TO   BE   NOTICED.  41 

ration  by  two  large  and  important  classes ;  on  the 
one  hand  by  the  Roman  Catholics,  and  on  the 
other  by  the  Rationalists  generally.  The  former 
do  it  for  the  purpose  of  maintaining  that  the 
Church,  not  only  of  primitive  but  of  modern  times, 
has  an  inspiration  equal  to  that  which  gave  the 
Bible.  While  theoretically  claiming  for  the  Spirit, 
which  is  alleged  to  be  residing  in  the  Church,  equal 
authority  with  the  Bible,  practically  they  exalt  it 
to  a  superiority  over  the  Bible ;  and  they  adroitly 
add  the  further  unfounded  assumption  that  they 
are  this  infallible  Church. 

The  latter  class,  claiming  more  or  less  to  be  the 
devotees  of  Reason,  confound  this  common  influ- 
ence of  the  Spirit  with  the  extraordinary  opera- 
tions of  Revelation  and  Inspiration,  in  such  a  way 
as  to  attribute  to  the  Apostles  and  to  the  inspired 
record  all  the  variability,  unceitainty,  and  defi- 
ciency which  are  readily  discovered  in  good  men 
everywhere,  acting  under  the  usual  leadings  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  in  common  life. 

That  inspiration  does  not  necessarily  imply  spir- 
itual illumination  in  the  sense  explained,  or  insure 
the  possession  of  saving  grace,  may  be  seen  in  the 
familiar  instances  of  the  prophet  Balaam,  of  King 
Saul,  of  the  high  priest  Caiaphas,  who  all  spoke 
under  divine  influence,  but,  so  far  as  we  can  judge, 
evidently  without  renewed  hearts. 

On  the  other  hand,  that  spiritual  illumination 
docs  not  imply  inspiration  is  apparent  iu  the  con- 


42  BIBLE   DOCTHINK   OF   INSPIRATION. 

sciousness  of  every  truly  regenerated  person  to-day. 
It  is  a  transparent  fallacy  to  allege  that,  because 
tlie  Spirit  that  works  these  two  things  is  the  same, 
therefore  the  operations  are  the  same,  —  to  assume 
that  the  Spirit  can  only  act  in  one  way  on  the  chil- 
dren of  God  in  different  ages  and  circumstances. 
Yet  this  is  what  is  tacitly  assumed,  as  if  unques- 
tionable, by  such  men  as  Schleiermacher,  Cole- 
ridge, Dr.  Thomas  Arnold,  F.  I).  Maurice,  and 
many  others,  writers  of  eminent  ability  and  worthy 
of  profound  respect,  with  whom  it  is  a  painful  duty 
to  differ,  but  still  an  imperative  duty. 

The  distinction  we  have  indicated  between  Reve- 
lation, Inspiration,  and  Spiritual  Illumination  is  not 
only  obvious  in  the  nature  of  the  case,  and  required 
by  the  instances  given,  in  which  one  of  these  influ- 
ences is  found  without  the  other,  but  seems  also 
suggested  by  the  express  language  of  the  Apostle 
Paul  in  1  Corinthians  ii.  10-14.  He  speaks  first 
(ver.  10)  of  the  things  naturally  unknown  which 
God  has  "  revealed  through  the  Spirit "  ;  then,  sec- 
ondly (ver.  12),  of  the  "  Spirit  which  is  of  God" 
being  received  that  under  its  illumination  "  we 
might  know  [that  is,  appreciate,  accept]  the  things 
that  are  freely  given  to  us  by  God,"  and  without 
which  "  the  natural  man  (ver.  14)  receiveth  not  the 
things  of  the  Spirit  of  God"  ;  then,  thirdly  (ver.  13), 
of  the  power  by  which  the^  uttered  the  things  that 
had  been  revealed  unto  them,  "  which  things  also 
we  speak,  not  in  words  which  man's  wisdom  teach- 


DISTINCTIONS  TO  BE  NOTICED,  43 

eth,  but  which  the  Spirit  teacheth."  Thus  what  we 
have  termed  Revelation,  Spiritual  Illumination,  and 
Inspiration,  are  each  presented  by  the  Apostle  in 
their   proper   relations  and  for  their   appropriate 

uses. 


CHAPTER  III. 
PRINCIPAL  VIEWS  OF  INSPIRATION  NOW  HELD. 

WE  pass  over  for  the  present  any  minute  re- 
view of  the  history  and  progress  of  opinion 
in  the  past,  as  to  Inspiration.  It  could  readily  be 
shown  how  present  controversies  are  but  reproduc- 
tions of  the  old  ;  and  also  that  the  views  which 
have  been  fairly  tried  and  found  wanting  might 
justly  be  now  set  aside.  It  must  suffice  to  state  in 
a  summary  way  the  principal  views  of  Inspiration 
prevalent  in  the  present  day. 

I.  The  first  is  the  theory  of  Mechanical  Inspi- 
ration, or,  as  it  has  been  termed,  the  Dictation 
Theory.  This  ignores  any  real  human  authorship 
whatever  in  the  Scriptures.  Each  of  the  various 
books,  and  every  part  of  them,  is  ascribed  to  God, 
in  such  a  sense  as  to  leave  no  room  for  human 
intelligence  or  activity.  The  inspired  man  was  as 
truly  and  merely  a  mechanical  instrument  as  the 
pen  with  which  the  writing  was  done. 

This  view  was  vigorously  and  unmistakably  ex- 
pressed by  J.  A.  Quenstedt :  — 

All  and  each  of  the  things  which  are  contained  in 
the  Sacred  Scriptures,  whether  they  were  naturally 


PRINCIPAL  VIEWS  NOW  HELD.,  45 

entirely  unknown  to  the  sacred  writers,  or  indeed 
naturally  knowable  yet  actually  unknown,  or  finally 
not  only  naturally  knowable  but  even  actually  known, 
whether  from  some  other  source  or  by  experience  and 
the  ministry  of  the  senses,  were  not  only  committed 
to  letters  by  divine,  infallible  assistance  and  direction, 
but  are  to  be  regarded  as  received  by  the  special  sug- 
gestion, inspiration,  and  dictation  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 
For  all  things  which  were  to  be  written  were  suggested 
by  the  Holy  Spirit  to  the  sacred  Avriters  in  the  very 
act  of  writing,  and  were  dictated  to  their  intellect  as 
if  unto  a  pen  {quasi  in  calamiivi),  so  that  they  might 
be  written  in  these  and  no  other  circumstances,  in 
this  and  no  other  mode  or  order.  —  Theol.  Didactico- 
Polemica,  IV.  2,  p.  67. 

In  like  manner  Carpzovius  says  :  — 

He  both  impelled  their  Avill  that  they  might  write, 
and  he  illuminated  their  mind  and  filled  it  by  the  sug- 
gestion of  the  things  and  words  to  be  indicated  that 
they  might  write  intelligently,  and  he  directed  their 
hand  that  they  might  write  infallibly,  and  yet  might 
not  contribute  anything  more  to  the  Scripture  than 
does  the  pen  of  the  ready  writer.  —  Critica  Sacra 
Veterls  Testamenti,  Pars  I.  p.  43. 

Robert  Hooker  —  the  "judicious  Hooker"  — 
says : — 

They  neither  spoke  nor  wrote  any  words  of  their 
own,  but  uttered,  syllable  by  syllable,  as  the  Spirit 
put  it  into  their  mouths.  —  Works,  II.  383. 


46  BIBLE  DOCTRINE  OF  INSBIRATION. 

Perhaps  Haldane  and  Carson,  among  recent 
writers  on  the  subject,  would  be  regarded  as  ap- 
proximating most  nearly  to  this  Dictation  Theory. 
But  it  is  scarcely  fair  to  charge  them  with  holding  it. 
Carson  says  :  "  The  Bible,  as  originally  given,  is  di- 
vine in  every  word."  (A.  Carson's  "Works,  Vol.  V. 
p.  5.)  But  he  affirms  as  clearly  as  any  one  the 
voluntary  and  conscious  activity  of  the  inspired 
men.  "  The  Holy  Spirit  speaks  through  man,  not 
as  he  did  through  Balaam's  ass,  or  as  he  might  do 
through  a  statue,  ])ut  as  a  rational  instrument. 
But  in  all  this  working  of  the  mind  of  man,  there 
is  nothing  that  is  not  truly  God's."  (p.  12.)  "  If 
God  has  employed  them  as  rational  instruments 
with  respect  to  style,  he  has  likewise  employed 
them  as  rational  instruments  with  respect  to  rea- 
sonings, thoughts,  arguments,  and  words."  (p.  21.) 
He  accounts  that  one  would  be  "  frantic  to  believe 
that  the  writers  of  the  Scriptures  were  unconscious 
organs."  (p.  73.)  And  again  he  says :  "  I  never 
met  an  individual  who  looked  upon  the  Evangelists 
as  merely  mechanical  hand-writers.  It  is  univer- 
sally believed  that  the  inspired  writers  were  rational 
organs  through  which  the  Holy  Spirit  communi- 
cated his  mind,  though  every  word  written  by  them 
in  the  Scriptures  was  from  God.  .  .  .  God  can  surely 
speak  his  words  through  man  in  such  a  way  that 
the  words  and  thoughts  shall  be  the  words  and 
thoughts  of  both."    (p.  lOo.) 

Dr.  Ladd,  who  is  certainly  the  most  elaborate. 


PRINCIPAL  VIEWS  NOW  HELD.  47 

and  probably  the  ablest,  of  all  the  recent  assailants 
of  the  strict  doctrine  of  the  Inspiration  of  Sacred 
Scripture,  admits  that  the  view  of  inspiration  which 
he  regards  as  incorrect  because  "  incompatible  with 
the  real  authorship  of  the  Biblical  writers,"  "  has 
doubtless  been,  on  the  whole,  most  generally  preva- 
lent "  in  the  Christian  Church.  "  This  view  of  in- 
spiration," he  says,  "  refers  the  minute  peculiarities 
and  variations  of  the  writers,  as  well  as  their  more 
important  authorial  characteristics,  to  the  dictation 
of  the  Holy  Spirit.  That  such  was  the  prevalent 
view  in  the  period  preceding  the  Christian  era,  not 
only  the  express  teachings  of  Philo  and  of  other 
authors  make  us  aware,  but  also  the  entire  manner 
of  rabbinical  interpretation  and  dialectics  from  the 
Hebrew  text.  That  this  was  the  predominant  view 
among  the  Church  Fathers,  we  have  also  seen.  In 
the  mediaeval  Church,  and  for  a  time  after  the 
Reformation,  this  element  of  the  dogma  was  more 
loosely  held.  But  it  became  again  an  inseparable 
and  vital  element  of  the  subsequent  Protestant 
view."  He  thinks  that  the  discussions  which  fol- 
lowed have  "  explicated  and  exalted  the  distinct- 
ively human  elements  in  all  inspired  Scripture," 
and  have  "  proved  that  the  differences  in  the  phe- 
nomena cannot  in  general  be  referred  to  the  imme- 
diate influence  of  the  Holy  Spirit."  (Doctrine  of 
Sacred  Scripture,  II.  259.)  Without  sharing  his 
opinions  on  that  subject,  it  is  safe  to  say  that  the 
convictions  of  the  great  body  of  Christian  people 


48  BIBLE   DOCTRINE   OF   INSPIRATION. 

in  every  age  have  referred  the  Scriptures  as  a  whole 
to  a  divine  origin,  while  we  do  not  believe  they  have 
intended  to  deny  the  real  human  authorship  con- 
current with  this,  however  much  their  language 
may  seem  sometimes  to  look  that  way. 

II.  Somewhat  as  a  reaction  from  extreme  state- 
ments like  those  of  Quenstedt  and  others  of  his 
time,  another  class  of  views  arose  which  may  be 
spoken  of  together  under  the  title  of  Partial  In- 
spiration, including  all  which  limit  the  inspiration 
to  certain  parts  or  sorts  of  the  sacred  writings. 
Under  this  may  be  distinguished  sundry  divisions, 
as  e.  g.  those  which  ascribe  inspiration  — 

a.  To  the  doctrinal  teachings  and  precepts,  ex- 
cluding the  narrative  and  emotional  parts ;  or 

b.  To  the  things  naturally  unknoivn  to  the  writ- 
ers,  and   therefore   needing   to   be    communicated 

'divinely  to  them,  while  in  all  other  matters  they 
were  left  to  themselves,  and  consequently  fell  into 
the  natural  inaccuracies  ordinarily  incident  to  all 
human  knowledge  and  speech,  however  sincere  and 
honest ;  or 

c.  To  the  ideas  in  their  general  train,  but  not  to 
the  language  used,  the  illustrations,  the  quotations 
and  allusions. 

Thus  it  is  sometimes  said  that  divine  inspiration 
belongs  to  the  truth  conveyed,  but  not  to  the  frame- 
work in  which  it  is  set ;  that  the  kernel  is  divine, 
but  the  shell  is  human  and  imperfect. 

Amonsr  those  who  would  change  the  statement 


PRINCIPAL   VIEWS   NOW   HELD.  49 

"  The  Bible  is  the  Word  of  God,"  into  "  The  Bi- 
ble contains  the  Word  of  God,"  may  be  named  Le 
Clerc  and  Grotius,  whose  views  may  be  readily 
traced  back  to  Maimonides,  the  celebrated  Jewish 
Eabbi  of  the  Middle  Ages. 

Semler  says  :  "  It  is  inconceivable  how  thought- 
ful Christians  confound  the  Sacred  Scripture  of 
the  Jews,  and  the  Word  of  God  which  is  here  and 
tnere  contained  and  enveloped  therein."  (Quoted 
in  Ladd,  II.  222.)  He  rejected  also  whole  books 
as  uninspired,  such  as  Chronicles,  Ezra,  Nehemiah, 
Esther,  Ruth,  Canticles,  Mark,  Philemon,  and  the 
Apocalypse,  as  well  as  numerous  narratives  of  the 
Old  Testament. 

Professor  George  T.  Ladd,  in  his  recent  learned 
and  able  work  on  the  Doctrine  of  Sacred  Scripture, 
vehemently  maintains  the  distinction  between  the 
Bible  and  the  Word  of  God.  It  "  brings  us  the 
Word  of  God  " ;  he  thinks  it  cannot  be  said  to  he 
the  Word  of  God.  "  The  claims  and  the  phenomena 
of  the  Bible  entitle  us  to  call  a  large  proportion  of 
its  writings  inspired."  (I.  759.)  "  The  most  obvi- 
ous and  necessary  of  all  the  distinctions  to  be  made, 
as  the  prerequisite  of  the  dogmatic  construction  of 
our  idea  of  Sacred  Scripture,  is  the  distinction  be- 
tween the  Bible  and  the  Word  of  God."  (II.  275, 
497.)  "  Its  most  untenable  extremes  "  (those  of 
the  Post-Reformation  dogma)  "  are  all  traceable  to 
that  fundamental  misconception  which  identifies  the 
Bible  and  the  Word  of  God."  (II.  178.) 

4 


60  BIBLE  DOCTRINE  OF  INSPIRATION. 

How  then,  it  may  be  asked,  are  we  to  distinguish 
between  the  Bible  and  this  "  inner  Bible  "  ?  By 
the  Christian  consciousness,  is  the  reply.  "  It 
belongs,  then,  to  the  Church,  in  every  age,  to  ex- 
amine the  sacred  writings  by  the  light  both  of 
tradition  and  of  its  own  spiritually  illumined  self- 
consciousness.  By  the  light  of  tradition  each  age 
discovers  what  the  previous  ages  have  considered 
to  be  canonical  Scriptures ;  by  the  light  of  its  own 
spiritually  illumined  consciousness  it  discerns  the 
Word  of  God  within  those  Scriptures."  (II.  502.) 

Of  course  no  one  doubts  that  "  the  Word  "  was 
first  preached  before  it  was  written,  and  that  this 
phrase  is  not  improperly  applied  to  the  general 
message  of  the  Gospel,  which  message  is  con- 
tained in  the  Bible.  (Compare  Luke  i.  2 ;  Mark 
ii.  2  ;  xiv.  14  ;  Acts  x.  36  ;  1  Thessalonians  ii.  13  ; 
2  Thessalonians  ii.  15 ;  2  Corinthians  v.  19.)  It 
is  also  used  in  a  peculiar  sense  for  the  Son  of  God, 
the  second  person  in  the  Holy  Trinity,  as  being  the 
utterance  or  manifestation  of  the  Father,  "  the 
personal  principle  of  divine  life  and  revelation." 
But  neither  of  these  uses  need  be  confounded  with 
the  sense  in  which  the  Bible,  as  being  the  sum- 
mary of  the  words  of  God,  is  called  the  Word  of 
God. 

Dr.  Ladd  claims  for  "  the  Church  "  the  "  right 
of  rejecting  from  this  Word  whatever  does  not 
satisfy  the  demands  of  its  ethico-religious  con- 
sciousness " ;   and  he  perceives  that  this  is  liable 


PRINCIPAL  VIEWS  NOW  HELD.  51 

to  the  objection  tliat  "  it  attaches  to  the  Word  of 
God  a  strange  and  dangerous  quality  of  mutability, 
and  thus  places  the  doctrine  and  life  of  the  Church 
in  constant  jeopardy."  He  replies,  that  "  a  certain 
mutability  necessarily  belongs  to  the  precise  limits 
of  the  Word  of  God,  as  scripturally  fixed,  however 
we  endeavor  to  determine  those  limits."  But  that 
is  a  question  of  Canon,  not  of  the  nature  of  Inspi- 
ration. If  Second  Peter,  for  instance,  be  clearly 
ascertained  to  be  not  genuine,  not  by  the  Apostle 
Peter,  we  should  not  regard  it  as  inspired,  or  as 
any  part  of  God's  Word.  It  professes  to  be  from 
"  Simon  Peter  "  ;  if  it  is  not,  but  from  some  other 
author,  it  bears  a  falsehood  on  its  face.  It  is  a 
fraud.  And  there  is  no  room  for  "  pious  frauds," 
or  any  other  sort  of  fraud,  in  the  Word  of  God. 

How  large  a  part  of  the  Bible  this  "  Christian 
consciousness"  would  recognize  and  admit  to  be 
the  Word  of  God,  is  not  anywhere  clearly  defined 
by  Dr.  Ladd.  "  A  marked  difference  must  be  ac- 
knowledged between  the  Old  Testament  and  the 
New."  The  New  Testament  is  "  in  nearly  all  its 
extent  the  vehicle  of  the  Divine  Word  of  salva- 
tion." The  Old  Testament  "  contains  many  divine 
words,"  nevertheless  it  "  contains  also  many  state- 
ments of  fact  and  doctrine  which  are  not  thus 
established,  confirmed,  and  approbated.  And  in 
general  we  must  admit  that  it  contains  the  Word 
of  God  only  in  a  preparatory  and  anticipating 
way."   (11.508-512.) 


52  BIBLE  DOCTRINE  OF  INSPIRATION. 

III.  Another  view  is  that  of  Different  Degrees 
OF  Inspiration.  Those  who  hold  this  opinion  in- 
sist that  all  Scripture  was  inspired,  but  not  all 
alike ;  some  parts  absolutely  and  fully,  others 
less  completely,  and  some  in  such  a  way  as  to 
give  considerable  room  for  imperfection  and  error. 
Three,  four,  or  five  degrees  are  alleged  by  different 
authors ;  but  those  usually  stated  are  superintend- 
ence, elevation,  direction,  suggestion,  —  the  degrees 
rising  respectively  in  the  amount  and  nature  of  the 
divine  control  supposed  to  be  exercised. 

These  authors  proceed  on  the  assumption  that 
there  is  error  in  the  Scripture,  and  that  this  is  to 
be  explained  consistently  with  its  divine  origin  by 
the  supposition  of  a  variable  mingling  of  the  hu- 
man and  the  divine  agency  in  the  composition  of 
the  Word ;  that  so  far  as  the  divine  element  pre- 
dominated there  was  infallible  accuracy  and  author- 
ity, but  so  far  as  the  human  element  was  combined 
with  it  there  was  or  might  be  failure. 

Two  very  different  classes  of  writers,  however, 
have  united  in  the  use  of  this  phraseology ;  some 
who  seem  eager  mainly  to  exhibit  the  supposed 
errors  and  mistakes  of  the  inspired  writers ;  others 
who  have  been  evidently  actuated  by  a  sincere  zeal 
for  the  honor  of  the  Word,  and  the  vindication  of 
truth,  and  have  held  fast  to  the  integrity  and  infal- 
libility of  the  Bible. 

Among  the  eminent  writers,  generally  orthodox, 
who  have  been  advocates  of  the  theory  which  lays 


PRINCIPAL    VIEWS  NOW  HELD.  53 

stress  on  Different  Degrees  of  Inspiration,  are 
Bp.  Daniel  Wilson,  Philip  Doddridge,  John  Dick, 
Leonard  Woods,  and  Enoch  Henderson. 

It  is  obvious  that  this  theory  also  may  be  traced 
back  to  the  Jewish  Rabbins,  who  undertook  to  ex- 
plain the  division  of  the  Old  Testament  into  the 
three  parts,  the  Law,  the*Prophets,  and  the  Hagio- 
grapha,  by  inventing  the  notion  of  three  degrees  of 
inspiration ;  the  Mosaic,  peculiar  to  him,  and  high- 
est of  all ;  the  Prophetic,  by  prophets  ;  while  the 
authors  of  the  Hagiographa  were  not  prophets,  but 
had  communications  chiefly  by  dreams,  and  were 
supposed  to  know  only  a  part  of  the  truth.  This 
degree  they  called  that  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  As 
Havernick  truly  says :  "  This  asserted  diversity  of 
Inspiration  appears,  even  in  its  definition,  to  be  so 
vague  and  inexact  that  one  can  hardly  form  any 
regular  conception  of  it.  Of  Biblical  grounds  it  is 
wholly  deficient :  nay,  the  New  Testament  rather 
decides  against  it,  from  the  manner  in  which  it 
speaks  of  David  and  Daniel  as  prophets."  (Intro- 
duction, I.  67.) 

The  modern  writers  who  adopt  this  theory  of 
Degrees  are  not  agreed  as  to  the  number  of  the 
"  degrees,"  nor  as  to  the  use  they  propose  to  make 
of  the  distinction.  Wilson  gives  four  degrees,  — 
suggestion,  direction,  elevation,  superintendence ; 
Doddridge  omits  direction ;  Henderson  makes  five, 
—  a  divine  excitement,  invigoration,  superintend- 
ence, guidance,  direct   revelation ;  J.  T.  Beck   of 


54  BIBLE  DOCTRINE  OF  INSPIRATION. 

Basle  gives  three  degrees,  —  the  pisteo-dynamical 
(Mark,  Luke,  Acts),  the  charismatical,  distributed 
over  the  first  community  of  believers,  and  the 
apoealyjjtic  (the  Apostles). 

Carson  objects,  with  decided  force,  to  this  whole 
theory  of  Degrees,  that,  "  if  this  distinction  of  in- 
spiration be  true,  the  greatest  part  of  the  Bible  is 
not  the  Word  of  God  at  all.  When  a  pupil  writes 
a  theme  by  the  direction  of  his  teacher,  with  every 
help  usually  afforded,  and  when  it  is  so  corrected 
by  the  latter  that  nothing  remains  but  what  is 
proper  in  his  estimation,  is  it  not  still  the  pupil's 
production  ?  Could  it  be  said  to  be  the  composi- 
tion or  the  work  of  the  teacher?  No  more  can 
the  Scriptures  be  called  the  Word  of  God  according 
to  this  mischievous  theory.  A  book  might  all  be 
true,  and  good,  and  important,  yet  not  be  the  book 
of  God."     (Works,  V.  31.) 

IV.  More  recently  a  view  has  arisen  which  may 
be  termed  that  of  Natural  Inspiration.  This 
affirms,  in  glowing  and  often  complimentary  phrases, 
an  inspiration  everywhere  in  the  Scriptures,  and 
the  same  throughout  substantially  ;  not  dictation 
as  the  first ;  nor  inspiration  in  spots,  as  the  second  ; 
nor  in  varying  degrees,  as  the  third.  But  it  de- 
grades the  whole  idea,  so  as  to  be  little  more  than 
a  strong  excitement  or  fervor,  which  all  men  have 
in  some  measure;  which  many  who  are  not  even 
good  men,  but  simply  heroes,  poets,  or  men  of 
genius,  may  share  ;  and  which  in  some  vague,  poetic 


PRINCIPAL  VIEWS  NOW  HELD.  55 

sense  may  be  called  divine.  The  inspiration  which 
they  allow  is  such  as  Milton  and  Shakespeare,  Bj-- 
ron  and  Shelley,  possessed,  or  even  Homer,  Plato, 
and  Socrates,  in  pre-Christian  times.  It  traces  all 
ths  sacred  books  of  the  world  to  substantially  the 
same  origin,  recognizing  Christianity  as  a  religion, 
but  simply  as  one  of  the  great  religions  of  the 
world  ;  nothing  less,  but  also  nothing  more.  Such 
is  the  view  of  Kuenen  and  other  Rationalist  theo- 
logians of  Holland  and  Germany,  of  F.  W,  Newman 
in  England,  and  of  Theodore  Parker  in  America. 

Morell  in  his  Philosophy  of  Religion  (127-179) 
comes  dangerously  near  to  this,  if  not  fully  adopt- 
ing it.  "  Inspiration,"  he  says,  "  is  only  a  higher 
potency  of  what  every  man  possesses  in  some 
degree  "  ;  to  which  Dr.  A.  H.  Strong  pertinently 
replies,  that  "  the  inspiration  of  everybody  is  equiv- 
alent to  the  inspiration  of  nobody."  This  view 
overlooks  the  fact,  that  man's  natural  insight  into 
moral  truth  is  vitiated  by  wrong  affections,  so  that 
unless  he  is  guided  from  above  he  is  certain  to  err. 
It  is  self-contradictory  in  admitting  inspirations 
which  annihilate  each  other,  the  Vedas  and  the 
Koran  as  well  as  the  Bible.  It  confounds  the  in- 
ward impulse  of  genius  with  the  impulse  from 
above,  man's  fancies  with  God's  voice. 

Theodore  Parker  did  nqt  deny  inspiration  to  the 
Scriptures,  but  did  not  confine  the  term  to  any 
religious  sense.  He  considered  works  of  intel- 
lectual genius  also  as  produced  by  its   influence, 


56  BIBLE  DOCTRINE  OF  INSPIRATION. 

and  that  good  men  of  old  spake  according  to  the 
light  which  was  in  them. 

V.  Another  view  closely  allied  to  this,  but  still 
quite  distinguishable  from  it,  is  that  of  Universal 
Christian  Inspiration.  It  refers  the  sacred  books, 
not  to  the  natural  suggestions  of  man,  but  to  the 
personal  influence  of  the  Holy  Spirit ;  but  repre- 
sents that  as  the  same  in  kind  with  the  ordinary 
illumination  of  every  Christian.  As  the  theory 
last  named  readily  connects  itself  with  Pelagian 
views  of  man's  nature,  so  this  is  not  unnaturally 
associated  with  those  ideas  which  unduly  exalt 
man's  agency,  and  affirm  his  co-operation  with  God 
in  the  matter  of  salvation. 

This  is  substantially  the  view  advanced  by  Schlei- 
ermacher,  whose  ideas  have  dominated  so  largely 
modern  theological  thought  in  Germany;  and,  with 
some  modifications,  by  Tholuck  and  Neander  ;  also 
by  Coleridge,  Thomas  Arnold,  F.  W.  Farrar,  Fred- 
erick W.  Robertson,  and  Martineau  in  England,  and 
by  T.  F.  Curtis  and  J.  F.  Clarke  in  America. 

Schleiermacher  ^  regarded  Inspiration  as  not  in- 
fallible, yet  as  something  higher  than  human 
genius,  —  "an  awakening  and  excitement  of  the  re- 
ligious consciousness,  different  in  degree  rather 
than  in  kind  from  the  pious  inspiration  or  intuitive 
feelings  of  holy  men."    (Curtis,  p.  88.) 

^  The  venerable  Dr.  Hodge  of  Princeton  was  once  lecturing  on  the 
theological  position  of  Schleiermacher.  As  the  lecture  in  its  more 
formal  part  was  over,  one  of  the  young  men  asked,   "Then,  Dr. 


PRINCIPAL  VIEWS  NOW  HELD.  57 

Coleridge  in.  his  "  Confessions  of  an  Inquiring 
Spirit "  contends  earnestly  that  the  line  of  demar- 
cation between  the  primitive  gifts  of  Spiritual  In- 
spiration and  the  inspirations  of  the  Spirit  now, 
was  a  line  drawn  without  authority.  Edward 
Ivring  seems  to  have  received  from  Coleridge's 
conversations  the  start  of  his  fanaticism.  (Com- 
pare Curtis  on  Inspiration,  p.  94.) 

F.  W.  EoBERTSON.  I  think  it  all  comes  to  this ; 
God  is  the  Father  of  Lights,  the  King  in  his  beauty, 
the  Lord  of  love.  All  our  several  degrees  of  knowl- 
edge attained  in  these  departments  [referring  to  the 
Excursion  of  Anaxagoras,  and  Newton's  revelation  of 
the  order  of  the  heavens]  are  from  him.  One  depart- 
ment is  higher  than  another ;  in  each  department 
the  degree  of  knowledge  may  vary  from  a  glimmering 

Hodge,  should  you  recommend  Schleiermacher's  teachings  as  good 
and  helpful  ? "  The  Doctor  in  answer  made  reference  to  the  ma- 
terialism of  Germany,  pointed  out  how  the  almost  mystic  teachings 
of  the  great  philosopher  might  have  been  of  great  good  for  his  own 
German  people,  when  they  would  not  be  so  for  England  or  America, 
and  then  concluded  by  saying  :  "  It  is  something  like  the  case  of 
the  ladder  in  the  pit.  We  are  passing  through  a  meadow,  let  us 
say,  where  we  come  upon  a  deep  pit.  In  the  bottom  you  see  mire 
and  filth,  while  against  the  sides  a  ladder  rests.  You  say  to  me, 
'  Dr.  Hodge,  is  it  a  good  thing  to  have  that  ladder  there  ? '  I 
should  answer,  '  That  depends  entirely  upon  what  purpose  you  would 
put  it  to.  If  men  have  stumbled  into  the  pit,  and  the  ladder  serves 
to  help  them  get  out,  then  it  is  surely  a  good  thing.  But  if  it 
should  only  be  tliere  to  lead  men  who  are  on  dry  ground  into  the 
pit,  it  would  manifestly  not  be  a  good  thing.  So  Schleiermacher's 
theology  might  stand  to  Germany  and  to  ourselves.'  "  It  is  need- 
less to  say  that  no  one  remained  in  darkness  as  to  Schleiermacher's 
place  after  that. —  Westminster  Teacher,  September,  1887. 


58  BIBLE   DOCTRINE   OF  INSPIRATION. 

glimpse  to  infallibility,  so  that  all  is  pro2)erli/  inspira- 
tion, but  immensely  differing  in  value  and  in  degree. 
If  it  be  replied  that  this  degrades  Inspiratio7i,  by  class- 
ing it  with  things  so  common,  the  answer  is  plain :  A 
sponge  and  a  man  are  both  animals,  but  the  degrees 
between  them  are  incalculable,  I  think  this  view  of 
the  matter  is  important,  because  in  the  other  way, 
some  twenty  or  thirty  men  in  the  world's  history  have 
had  special  communication,  miraculous  and  from  God  ; 
in  this  way,  all  have  it,  and  by  devout  and  earnest 
cultivation  of  the  mind  and  heart  may  have  it  inim- 
itably increased.  —  Life  and  Letters,  Vol.  I.  p.  271, 
Vol.  II.  pp.  143-150,  Sermon  I. 

F.  W.  Farrar.  To  us,  as  to  the  holy  men  of  old, 
the  Spirit  still  utters  the  living  oracles  of  God.  — 
History  of  Interpretation,  Preface,  p.  xvi. 

T.  F.  Curtis  divides  the  views  held  into  three 
classes,  and  describes  the  first  as  that  of  absolute 
infallibility  of  Scripture  in  every  part ;  and  the 
second,  that  which  considers  "  the  scientific  and 
historical  matter  of  the  Bible  as  colored  by  the  age 
and  opinions  of  the  writer,  and  therefore  not  ren- 
dered infallible  by  Inspiration,  while  yet  the  reli- 
gious portions  are  thus  absolutely  and  entirely 
infallible."  He  objects  to  both  of  these,  and  classes 
himself  with  the  third,  "  who  look  npon  Inspiration 
as  a  positive  and  not  a  negative  divine  power ;  as 
not  destroying  but  elevating  the  human  element  in 
man  [?]  ;  as  not  conferring  a  necessary  or  absolute 
immunity  from  all  error  or  infirmity,  but  as  guid- 


PRINCIPAL   VIEWS  NOW   HELD.  59 

ing  the  authors  and  quickening  their  writings  with 
a  divine  life,  and  clothing  them  with  a  divine 
authority  similar  precisely  to  that  with  which  the 
Apostles  themselves  were  endowed,  when  commis- 
sioned to  institute  and  establish  the  primitive 
Church.  That  is  to  say,  their  inspiration  gave 
them  certain  Divine  powers  as  a  whole,  leaving 
their  individual  and  human  errors  to  be  eliminated 
by  degrees  as  necessary  for  the  life  of  truth."  (Hu- 
man Element  in  the  Inspiration  of  the  Scriptures, 
p.  120.)  The  Church  of  Christ,  he  thinks,  is  an 
inspired  body.  "  Though  the  membership  of  it 
may  be  invisible  to  mortal  eyes,  it  acts  with  a  vis- 
ible and  inspired  power  and  authority  upon  each 
age,  nation,  and  community,  leading  it  forward 
with  a  heavenly  instinct  and  superior  wisdom. 
There  is  the  home  of  the  Paraclete  on  earth.  Thus 
all  become  in  measure  inspired  with  the  presence 
of  the  Saviour,  the  life  of  God."     (iSic?.,  p.  311.) 

VI.  The  doctrine  which  we  hold  is  that  com- 
monly styled  Plenary  Inspiration,  or  Full  Inspira- 
tion. It  is  that  the  Bible  as  a  whole  is  the  Word 
of  God,  so  that  in  every  part  of  Scripture  there  is 
both  infallible  ti'uth  and  divine  authority. 

These  two  characteristics  are  distinguishable. 
Statements  might  be  true,  exactly  true,  yet  not 
conveyed  to  us  on  divine  authority.  The  union  of 
absolute  truth  and  divine  authority  constitutes  the 
claim  of  the  Scripture  to  our  faith  and  obedience. 

This  brief  statement  comprehends  the  whole  of 


60  BIBLE  DOCTRINE  OF  INSPIRATION. 

our  doctrine  on  the  subject.  Nevertheless,  in 
order  to  promote  the  clearer  understanding  of  our 
view,  it  may  be  desirable  to  present  some  explana- 
tions and  distinctions,  and  to  exhibit  the  doctrine 
both  negatively  and  positively. 


CHAPTER  lY. 

NEGATIVE  STATEMENTS  OF  THE  DOCTRINE. 

npHAT  our  view  may  be  cordially  accepted,  or 
even  candidly  examined,  it  is  important  that 
it  should  be  clearly  understood.  Hence  we  beg 
leave,  in  further  explanation,  to  submit  several 
negative  statements  concerning  it,  to  avoid  mis- 
apprehension. 

Our  business  is  to  get  at  the  facts.  This  is  the 
true  scientific  method.  We  propose  to  apply  the 
principle  of  exclusion.  In  many  scientific  ques- 
tions, the  beginning  of  progress  is  found  in  ascer- 
taining what  a  thing  is  not.  Heat,  for  example, 
we  know  is  not  matter,  it  is  not  the  same  with 
electricity,  or  light,  it  is  not  ponderable,  etc.  So 
in  other  things.  Some  negative  statements  may 
clear  the  way  for  future  consideration  and  argu- 
ment. 

A.     Inspiration  is  not  to  be  explained  as  to  the 
Mode  of  the  Divine  Influence. 

It  will  be  perceived  that  we  have  given  no  Theory 
of  Inspiration,  nor  attempted  to  show  how  it  was 
accomplished.  This  omission  was  not  from  acci- 
dent or  neglect.     We  expressly  avoid  and  refuse 


62  BIBLE  DOCTRINE  OF  INSPIRATION. 

it.  The  question  is  one  of  fact,  not  of  theory. 
The  Scriptures  omit  to  give  any  theory,  any  ac- 
count of  the  mode  of  inspiration,  any  explanation 
of  the  phenomenon.  They  assert  it  as  a  fact ;  they 
do  not  tell  how  it  was  accomplished.  Upon  the 
supposition  that  it  is  supernatural,  as  we  have 
affirmed,  it  is  impossible  that  there  should  be  any 
legitimate  or  adequate  theory  of  it  devised  by 
human  intellect. 

Much  of  the  difficulty  supposed  to  overhang  the 
subject  arises  from  ill-judged  attempts  at  conceiv- 
ing or  describing  lioiv  God  inspired  men,  forgetful 
of  the  fact  that  every  supernatural  phenomenon  is 
above  explanation,  and  that  both  revelation  and  in- 
spiration are  so,  just  as  really  as  the  multiplication 
of  the  five  loaves,  or  the  turning  of  the  water  into 
wine. 

As  to  revelation^  we  do  not  know  how  it  was  im- 
parted. How  would  one  go  about  to  discover  the 
nature  of  the  divine  operation  involved  ?  Except 
the  prophet  himself,  who  received  the  revelation, 
what  man  could  testify  on  the  subject  ?  There  is 
no  other  possible  point  of  contact  by  which  it  can 
be  brought  within  the  sphere  of  human  observation. 
And  even  to  the  prophet  was  it  not  still  a  mystery? 
Do  not  all  the  indications  point  towards  that  con- 
clusion ?  Possibly  he  did  not  know ;  certainly  we 
do  not  know. 

So  too  the  inspiration  is  not  explicable  by  us,  any 
more  than  the  condition  of  the  withered  hand,  at  the 


NEGATIVE   STATEMENTS  OF  THE  DOCTRINE.      63 

instant  that  it  was  healed,  and  restored  to  activity 
by  supernatural  power.  If  the  change  in  the  hand 
or  arm  was  properly  supernatural,  no  explanation 
as  to  how  it  was  done  can  make  it  more  intelligible, 
no  lack  of  explanation  more  incredible.  Just  so  as 
to  the  inspiration.  We  have  no  reason  to  suppose 
that  it  was  understood  as  to  the  nature  or  mode  of 
its  operation,  even  by  those  who  enjoyed  it ;  much 
less  can  it  be  intelligible  to  others,  who  never 
experienced  it ;  and  certainly  those  who  had  it 
never  undertook  to  explain  its  nature  for  our 
enlightenment. 

Even  spiritual  illumination,  which  seems  nearer 
to  us,  which  has  been  promised  to  every  age,  and 
which  we  trust  we  have  individually  experienced, 
is  very  imperfectly  explicable  by  us.  "VVe  know  the 
effects,  not  the  way  in  which  the  Spirit  operates  to 
produce  them. 

"  The  wind  bloweth  where  it  listeth,  and  thou 
hearest  the  sound  thereof,  but  canst  not  tell  whence 
it  Cometh,  and  whither  it  goeth  ;  so  is  every  one 
that  is  born  of  the  Spirit."  And  if  this  new  birth 
is  inscrutable  to  us,  how  can  we  theorize  on  the 
other  influences,  which  we  have  never  enjoyed  ? 

B.    Inspiration  is  not  Mechanical. 

A  view,  that  is  justly  chargeable  as  Mechanical, 
appears  to  have  been  expressed  by  some  of  the 
writers  subsequent  to  the  Reformation,  such  as 
Quenstedt,   heretofore   quoted,  Calovius,  Voetius, 


64  BIBLE  DOCTRINE   OF  INSPIRATION. 

and  the  Formula  Consensus  Helvetica.  They  do 
not  leave  room  for  any  conscious  or  voluntary 
activity  of  the  writers  whom  the  Holy  Spirit  em- 
ployed, but  regard  them  as  mere  machines.  They 
were  driven  into  this  extreme,  probably,  by  two 
causes. 

They  were  so  anxious  to  claim  and  defend  the 
divine  authorship,  that  they  overlooked  the  human 
authorship  ;  just  as,  in  vindicating  the  divine  sov- 
ereignty and  efficiency,  some  Calvinists  then  and 
since  have  overlooked  or  denied  human  freedom 
and  responsibility. 

Besides,  they  were  in  vigorous  and  deadly  con- 
flict with  the  Papacy ;  and  in  antagonism  to  the 
claim  of  an  infallible,  inspired  Church,  uttering 
in  every  syllable  the  voice  of  God,  they  were  eager 
to  set  up,  in  the  most  uncompromising  form,  the 
counter  authority  of  an  inspired,  infallible  Bible, 
so  purely  divine  as  to  exclude  all  human  will  or 
authorship. 

It  is  of  this  view  that  Farrar  speaks  so  harshly 
and  in  such  denunciatory  terms  (Hist,  of  Interpre- 
tation, Preface,  p.  xx),  unfortunately,  however, 
confounding  it  with  the  current  or  orthodox  view, 
which  is  not  legitimately  liable  to  such  charges. 
He  allows  himself  to  say,  "  From  it  every  mistaken 
method  of  interpretation,  and  many  false  views  of 
morals  and  sociology,  have  derived  their  disastrous 
origin.  ...  It  sprang  from  heathenism,  and  it  leads 
to  infidelity." 


NEGATIVE  STATEMENTS  OF  THE  DOCTRINE.   65 

Prof.  Geo.  T.  Ladd,  in  like  manner,  while  ex- 
ercising a  marked  and  admirable  courtesy  towards 
all  other  opponents,  never  wearies  of  severe  and 
caustic  expressions  against  the  "  Post-Reformation 
Dogma,"  its  "  dreadful  pressure "  (II.  182),  its 
"monstrous  assumptions"  (II,  152),  the  "stolid 
predisposition  to  maintain  the  Post-Reformation 
Dogma"  (11.  247),  etc. 

Some  of  the  early  Christian  writers,  commonly 
called  Fathers,  used  expressions  which  have  been 
understood  to  imply  that  they  regarded  inspiration 
as  mechanical.  But  they  seem  to  have  used  them 
as  illustrations,  and  in  a  rhetorical  way,  rather 
than  as  meaning  to  be  strictly  interpreted.  For 
example,  they  spoke  sometimes  of  the  inspired  man 
as  a  pen  in  the  hand  of  God,  or  a  lyre  touched 
by  the  musician.  Another  illustration  sometimes 
used  was  that  of  the  amanuensis  or  copyist.  But 
we  are  not  solicitous  either  to  vindicate  their 
soundness,  or  to  gain  the  weight  of  their  great 
names  for  our  opinions.  What  does  the  Word  of 
God  teach  ? 

There  is  no  Scriptural  ground  for  either  of  these 
figures  of  speech.  The  inspired  writer  is  not  de- 
scribed either  as  the  pen  or  the  penman.  The 
Bible  does  not  represent  verbal  dictation  to  an 
amanuensis  as  the  method  adopted,  either  in  reve- 
lation or  inspiration.  So  far  as  there  is  any  anal- 
ogy apparent,  the  case  of  dictation  to  a  penman  is 
more  like  revelation  than  inspiration.     The  act  of 

5 


60  BIBLE   DOCTRINE   OF  INSPIRATION. 

committing  to  writing  that  wliicli  is  dictated  dif- 
fers very  much  from  what  we  understand  to  have 
occurred  in  writing  or  spealiing  what  is  inspired. 
The  difference  is  this :  that  there  is,  where  we 
dictate,  no  control  over  the  will  of  the  amanuensis  ; 
and  also  that  there  is  no  aid  to  his  memory,  reflec- 
tion, imagination,  or  power  of  expression,  on  the 
supposition  of  his  being  willing  but  unable  to  give 
accurately  what  had  been  communicated  to  him. 
Both  the  control,  and  the  imparted  power  which 
we  believe  to  belong  to  inspiration  are  lacking.' 
At  Sinai  the  people,  as  well  as  Moses,  heard 
audible  words  uttered  from  the  midst  of  the  fire 
Though  we  have  no  idea  how  it  was  done,  we 
unhesitatingly  believe  this,  because  it  is  distinctly 
so  recorded.  (Exodus  xix.  19 ;  xx.  1, 19,  22  ;  Deu- 
teronomy iv.  33,  36  ;  v.  4,  22.)  This  was  dictation, 
if  you  please  to  call  it  so,  but  there  is  no  indication 
that  the  people  were  inspired  to  record  what  they 
heard.  In  like  manner,  distinct  words  from  heaven 
were  spoken  at  the  Baptism  of  Jesus  (Matthew 
iii.  7),  at  the  Transfiguration  (Matthew  xvii.  5),  at 
Jerusalem  during  the  feast  (John  xii.  28),  and  to 
Paul  near  Damascus  (Acts  xxvi.  14-18.)    So  much 

1  Dictation  to  an  amanuensis  is  not  teaching.  (Compare  1  Corin- 
thians ii.  13,  "Words  which  the  Holy  Ghost  teachetli.")  He  may- 
write  dictated  words  of  wisdom,  without  possessing  any  of  the  wis- 
dom from  which  they  proceed,  without  receiving  any  instructions, 
and  without  even  thinking  about  the  import  of  what  he  writes. 
The  Holy  Scriptures  were  not  written  after  this  manner.  —  John 
L.  Dagg,  Article  in  Alabama  Baptist. 


NEGATIVE  STATEMENTS  OF  THE  DOCTRINE.   67 

we  know  as  to  some  direct  divine  utterances.  But 
it  is  not  our  belief  that  this  was  the  method  by 
which  the  reveLT.tions  recorded  in  the  Bible  were 
generally  given.^ 

Many  of  the  instructions  recorded  by  Moses  and 
by  the  prophets  are  prefaced  by  the  words  :  "  The 
Lord  spake  unto  Moses,  saying"  ;  or,  "  The  Word 
of  the  Lord  came  to  Jeremiah  "  ;  or,  "  Thus  saith 
the  Lord  to  Cyrus."  But  that  there  was  in  these 
cases  any  audible  voice  uttered,  I  do  not  see  stated 
or  fairly  implied. ^ 

The  Scriptures  observe  a  guarded  silence  on  this 
matter.  There  is  generally  no  hint  of  the  mode  of 
the  divine  action  in  imparting,  or  of  the  mental 
activity   in   receiving   and    uttering  the   message. 

1  The  manifoklness  of  Scripture,  in  comparison  with  the  work  of  a 
single  author,  is  well  brought  out  by  Dean  Stanley  in  his  descrip- 
tion of  the  Koran.  "  It  is  as  the  Old  Testament  might  be  if  com- 
posed of  the  writings  of  the  single  prophet  Isaiah,  or  Jeremiah  ;  or 
the  New  Testament,  if  it  were  composed  of  the  writings  of  the  single 
Apostle  Paul.  It  is  what  the  Bible  as  a  whole  would  be,  if  from  its 
Images  were  excluded  all  individual  personalities  of  its  various  writers, 
all  differences  of  time  and  place  and  character.  .  .  .  The  Koran  rep- 
resents not  merely  one  single  person,  but  one  single  stage  of  society. 
It  is,  with  few  exceptions,  purely  Arabian.  It  is  what  the  Bible 
would  be,  if  all  external  iniluences  were  obliterated,  and  it  was 
wrapped  up  in  a  single  phase  of  Jewish  life.  The  Koran  '  stays  at 
home  ' ;  the  Bible  is  the  book  of  the  world,  the  companion  of  every 
traveller,  read  even  when  not  beloved,  necessary  even  when  unwel- 
come." —  History  of  the  Eastern  Church,  p.  372. 

^  How  did  God  conmiunicate  these  things  to  them  ?  If  I  may  be 
pardoned  for  adopting  the  expression  of  a  fair  German  friend,  de- 
scribing how  they  answer  some  questions  in  Saxony,  I  would  say, 
"  Ich  kann  es  ganz  genaii  sagen:  Ich  wei.ss  nicht,"  —  "I  can  tell 
that  exactly  :  I  do  not  know." 


68  BIBLE  DOCTRINE  OF  INSPIRATION. 

This  silence  of  Scripture  is  not  without  signifi- 
cance. It  leads  to  the  inference  that  there  is  noth- 
ing in  the  communications  of  human  beings  with 
one  another  that  really  and  fully  resembles  it. 
"We  must  stop  short  then  at  the  boundaries  where 
the  Bible  descriptions  stop,  and  not  attempt  to  be 
wise  above  what  is  written. 

C.    Inspiration  was  not  destructive  of  Consciousness, 
Self-control,  or  Individuality. 

This  has  often  been  imputed  to  the  doctrine 
commonly  held,  but  not  justly.  There  was  a  hea- 
then idea  of  that  sort  as  to  their  oracles.  And 
some  of  the  early  heretics,  the  Montanists  espe- 
cially, fell  into  similar  views.  But  it  has  not  been 
at  any  time  the  doctrine  of  the  great  body  of  intel- 
ligent Christians.  It  certainly  is  not  the  doctrine 
that  we  maintain,  or  that  is  found  in  the  Bible. 

The  individuality  of  the  sacred  writers,  as  well 
as  their  intelligent,  voluntary  action,  was  not  su- 
perseded by  the  Spirit's  influence ;  but  both  these 
were  employed. 

Every  man  has  a  combination  of  peculiarities 
which  distinguish  him  from  others.  That  is  his 
individuality.  It  arises  from  various  sources,  from 
birth,  education,  environment,  one's  own  will,  habit, 
the  grace  of  God.  But  from  whatever  source  or 
sources  it  originates,  it  influences  his  whole  being. 
It  moulds  his  thoughts,  feelings,  expressions.  Now 
this  is  the  material  on  which  we  suppose  that  In- 


NEGATIVE  STATEMENTS  OF  THE  DOCTRINE.      69 

spiration  acted.  As  in  Regeneration,  Spiritual  Illu- 
mination does  not  destroy  the  old  faculties  and 
substitute  others,  but  changes  the  direction  of  the 
currents  that  flow  in  the  old  channels,  so  in  Inspi- 
ration. If  the  sacred  writers  are  Hebrew,  they 
speak  Hebrew;  if  Greek,  they  speak  Greek;  if 
Hebrew-Greek,  they  use  Hebrew-Greek.  One  of 
them  is  naturally  warm,  ardent,  impulsive,  another 
majestic,  deliberate,  solemn ;  one  is  cultivated,  an- 
other rude ;  one  pours  fortli  a  trumpet  strain, 
another  breathes  notes  soft  and  enchanting  as  an 
-^olian  harp.  So  of  all  other  peculiarities  arising 
from  constitution,  habits,  age,  country,  etc.  Amos, 
a  gatherer  of  sycamore  fruit,  Isaiah,  brought  up 
at  court,  Peter,  the  Galilean  fisherman,  Paul,  the 
pupil  of  Gamaliel,  each  writes  in  his  own  style, 
under  the  influence  of  the  same  Spirit. 

This  marked  individuality  is  manifest  in  every 
part  of  the  Scriptures ;  it  is  the  most  obvious  and 
primary  fact  that  presents  itself  to  the  careful 
student.     It  must  never  be  lost  sight  of. 

D.  Inspiration  is  not  merely  a  Natural  Elevation  of 
the  Faculties,  analogous  to  the  Stimulus  of  Pas- 
sion and  Enthusiasm,  or  to  Poetic  Genius. 

Many  assert  inspiration,  meaning  by  it,  however, 
no  more  than  this.  But  that  is  keeping  the  word, 
and  practically  renouncing  the  doctrine.  If  the 
only  inspiration  which  the  Bible  lias  is  that  which 
is  common  to  all  Christian  men,  or  even  to  all  men 


70  BIBLE  DOCTRINE  OF  INSPIRATION. 

of  genius,  whether  godly  or  not,  or  even  to  all  men, 
as  some  say,  it  cannot  furnish  us  with  any  in- 
fallible or  authoritative  guidance.  To  make  our 
doctrine  clear,  and  the  grounds  of  it,  we  must  con- 
sider at  length  some  distinctions  as  to  that  most 
momentous  of  theological  topics,  the  Influence  of 
the  Holy  Spirit. 

There  are  three  spheres  or  provinces  in  which 
the  Bible  teaches  that  the  Spirit  operates  : 

a.  That  of  Nature^  including  influences  over  in- 
animate things,  as  where  the  Spirit  o£  God  moved 
(was  brooding)  upon  the  waters  (Genesis  i.  2)  ; 
upon  animals,  in  their  creation  and  renewal  (Psalm 
civ.  30)  ;  and  over  the  human  mind  and  soul,  yet 
falling  short  of  any  saving  influences.  These  last 
are  sometimes  styled  the  common  operations  of  the 
Spirit,  because  shared  by  believers  and  unbelievers, 
by  regenerate  and  unrcgcnerate.  Such  are  the 
influences  which  restrain  bad  men  from  evil,  and 
urge  occasional  impulses  towards  good,  even  in  the 
worst. 

h.  The  sphere  of  Grace,  where  the  Spirit  operates 
in  originating  spiritual  life,  i.  e.  in  regeneration ;  and 
in  sustaining  and  elevating  it,  or  in  preservation 
and  sanctification.  In  these,  not  all  men,  but  all 
the  saved,  and  they  only,  share.  This  influence  is 
needed,  and  is  bestowed  to  accompany  the  Word, 
and  make  it  effective.  It  is  not  limited  to  the  nat- 
ural or  moral  influence  of  tlie  truth  itself.  It  is  a 
personal,  vital  energy,  quickening  the  soul  that  was 


NEGATIVE  STATEMENTS  OF  THE  DOCTRINE.      71 

dead  in  trCvSpasses  and  sins,  and  illuminating  the 
religious  understanding  of  God's  children. 

c.  The  sphere  of  the  Supernatural,  where  the 
Spirit  operates  either  directly,  or  by  enabling  men 
to  perform  superhuman  wonders.  These  arc  of 
two  kinds,  —  wonders  of  i^oiver,  commonly  called 
signs  or  miracles,  and  wonders  of  knowledge,  com- 
monly called  prophecies,  which  were  usually  the 
effect  of  Revelation  and  Inspiration  conjoined. 

Often  the  Spirit  united  all  these  forms  of  the 
supernatural  in  one  person,  as  well  as  the  precedent 
influences  of  grace ;  so  that  He  created  and  kept 
the  man  in  being,  then  converted  and  renewed 
him,  then  communicated  the  truth  to  him  by  rev- 
elation, then  enabled  him  to  work  miracles  to  at- 
test it ;  and,  still  further,  gave  the  supernatural 
accuracy  and  authority  in  recording  it  which  could 
pertain  to  none  but  an  inspired  man.  But  these 
different  influences  were  not  always  united.  Some- 
times they  were,  but  not  invariably ;  and  even  when 
occurring  together,  they  can  be  profitably  distin- 
guished and  considered  separately. 

Each  of  these  was  distinct  both  in  object  and 
result.  On  men  in  general,  and  still  more  on  the 
lower  creatures,  the  Spirit  of  God  acted  and  still 
acts,  with  no  intention  to  clothe  them  with  author- 
ity, or  even  to  make  them  holy,  but  to  sustain 
them  in  being  and  activity.  And  as  the  object  in 
view  differs,  so  the  result  differs. 

In  the  first  case,  accordingly,  i.  e.  in  the  realm 


72  BIBLE  DOCTRINE   OF  INSPIRATION. 

of  Nature,  the  result  is  continued  existence,  in- 
cluding activity  and  all  that  is  involved  in  physical 
life.  And  the  design  is  no  wider  or  larger  than 
the  result.  In  the  second  case,  the  realm  of  Grace, 
the  result  is  salvation.  No  infallibility  is  secured 
to  true  Christians  in  general,  no  absolute  exemp- 
tion from  error  is  promised  or  is  produced ;  only 
God's  faithfulness  is  pledged,  and  secures  that  they 
shall  not  fall  finally  or  fatally  away.  In  the  third 
case,  that  of  the  Supernatural,  including  both  revela- 
tion and  inspiration,  as  well  as  the  working  of  evi- 
dential signs,  there  is  a  commission  to  speak  and 
act  in  the  name  and  by  the  autliority  of  God. 

It  would  be  wrong  to  say  that,  in  the  influences  of 
grace,  the  men  whom  God  actuates  and  moves  are 
thereby  rendered  infallible.  That  would  imply  the 
personal  infallibility  and  absolute  sanctity  of  every 
truly  converted  person.  It  is  no  less  an  error  to 
say  that,  in  the  supernatural  realm,  the  men  whom 
He  actuates  and  moves  are  not  infallible  and  au- 
thoritative as  to  the  things  for  which  they  were 
commissioned.  To  secure  that  was  the  very  object 
of  the  influence.  The  only  question  of  importance 
is  to  ascertain  when  the  divine  influences  belong  to 
the  one  class,  and  when  to  the  other.  This  must 
be  decided  by  the  evidence  appropriate  to  such  facts, 
and  cannot  be  ascertained  except  by  considering 
the  divine  promises  and  the  actual  results  in  each 
case,  the  claims  made,  and  the  sanction  or  attesta- 
tion given  to  the  truth  of  the  claims. 


NEGATIVE  STATEMENTS  OF  THE  DOCTRINE.   73 

Bezaleel,  the  architect  of  the  tabernacle,  and 
Samson,  the  giant  champion,  were  moved  by  the 
Spirit.  But  when  we  consider  the  design  and  the 
result  accomplished,  we  perceive  that  he  endowed 
the  one  with  inventive  power  to  devise  and  execute 
skilful  works  in  gold  and  silver  for  the  honor  of 
God  in  liis  movable  temple,  and  the  other  with 
supernatural  strength  to  fight  and  destroy  the  Phi- 
listines ;  but  he  gave  neither  of  them,  so  far  as  we 
learn,  any  commission  to  speak  or  to  write  for  him. 
By  an  entirely  different  sort  of  influence  their  re- 
spective contemporaries,  Moses  and  Samuel,  were 
moved  to  speak  in  God's  name,  and  so,  even  as 
other  holy  men  of  God,  they  "  spake  as  they  were 
moved  by  the  Holy  Ghost." 

While  therefore  we  freely  grant  that  all  good  in 
any  man  proceeds  from  the  influences  of  God's 
Spirit  upon  him,  this  does  not  imply  that  the  influ- 
ence is  the  same  in  all  men  because  the  source  is  the 
same ;  or  that  we  must  confound  all  the  saving  im- 
pressions and  drawings  of  the  Spirit  with  the  higher 
influence  which  produces  infallibility  in  teaching, 
and  confers  divine  authority  in  giving  commands. 

We  have  dwelt  specially,  and  with  some  repeti- 
tion, on  these  points,  because  it  is  not  uncommon 
for  the  opponents  of  the  stricter  view^s  of  Inspira- 
tion to  err,  and  to  lead  the  unwary  into  error  just 
here,  by  confounding  these  three  spheres  in  which 
the  Spirit  operates,  and  the  different  influences 
appropriate  to  them. 


74  BIBLE  DOCTRINE  OF  INSPIRATION. 

F.  D.  Maurice,  a  profound  admirer  of  Coleridge, 
and  prone  to  recognize  the  inward  light,  rather 
than  an  objective  revelation,  as  the  source  of  the 
divine  Word  and  the  fountain  of  all  good,  virtually 
denies  any  special  supernatural  agency  in  the  In- 
spiration of  the  Bible.  He  says,  for  instance,  "  We 
must  forego  the  demand  we  make  on  the  con- 
sciences of  the  young,  when  we  compel  them  to 
say  that  they  regard  the  inspiration  of  the  Bible  as 
generically  distinct  from  that  which  God  bestows 
on  his  children  in  this  day."  Because  the  English 
Liturgy  very  properly  says,  it  is  "  God's  holy  in- 
spiration that  enables  us  to  think  those  things  that 
be  good," — using  the  word  inspiration,  not  tech- 
nically, but  in  that  general  sense  in  which  it 
expresses  any  influence  of  the  Spirit,  —  he  asks : 
"  Ought  we  in  our  sermons  to  say.  Brethren,  we 
beseech  you  not  to  suppose  the  inspiration  of  Scrip- 
ture to  at  all  resemble  that  for  which  we  have  been 
praying ;  they  are  generically  and  essentially  un- 
like ;  it  is  blasphemous  to  connect  them  in  our 
minds,  and  the  Church  is  very  guilty  for  having 
suggested  the  association." 

The  object  of  this  somewhat  extravagant  appeal 
is  obvious.  It  is  to  lead  to  the  inference  that,  if 
Christians  noiv  may  err,  so  inspired  men  may  have 
done.  If  the  influence  from  wdiich  all  good  thoughts 
and  all  right  works  do  proceed  does  not,  as  every- 
body well  knows,  secure  ordinary  Christians  from 
mistake  or  confer   infallibility,  he  would  have  us 


NEGATIVE  STATEMENTS  OF  THE  DOCTRINE.      75 

infer,  neither  does  the  inspiration  whicli  the  sacred 
writers  enjoyed. 

But  it  is  an  utter  fallacy  thus  to  blend  all  spir- 
itual influences  as  if  they  were  one,  merely  because 
they  may  be  included  under  a  common  name. 
They  may  be  alike,  and  yet  unlike.  It  may  be  no 
blasphemy  "  to  connect  them  in  our  minds,"  and 
yet  it  may  be  perfectly  possible  and  important  to 
distinguish  them  in  our  minds, — and  to  connect 
or  compare  them  for  tlie  express  purpose  of  distin- 
guishing them. 

As  Pantheism,  making  God  and  the  Universe 
identical,  destroys  His  distinctness  from  what  He 
created,  and  so  ignores  His  Personality,  so  this 
theory  of  Inspiration,  by  blending  all  the  voices 
that  proceed  from  God,  and  raising  each  to  the 
same  pitch  and  force,  prevents  us  from  hearing 
any.  All  proper  distinction  between  the  Bible  and 
other  religious  books  written  by  good  men  is  anni- 
hilated. A  new  term  of  reproach,  Bibliolatry,  is 
invented  wherewith  to  stigmatize  those  that  rever- 
ence the  supreme  authority  of  God's  Word.  And 
in  these  strange  times  into  which  we  have  fallen,  it 
is  openly  affirmed  that  some  of  the  leading  Deists 
are  ministers  of  the  Church  of  England,  and  offi- 
ciating publicly  at  her  altars.  However  that  may 
be,  it  is  certain  that  on  the  Continent  some  of  the 
leading  opponents  of  vital  Christianity  and  most 
energetic  assailants  of  the  veracity  of  the  Bible, 
some  who  deny  that  it  differs  in  any  essential  fea- 


76  BIBLE  DOCTRINE  OF  INSPIRATION. 

ture  from  the  Koran  or  the  Zendavesta,  are  not 
only  ministers  of  the  estabHshed  churches,  but 
selected  and  eminent  instructors  in  their  theologi- 
cal schools,  and  trainers  of  their  rising  ministry. 

The  Rev.  John  Macnaught,  a  disciple  of  Maurice, 
goes  indeed  further  than  his  leader,  and  blends  in 
one  all  the  three  forms  of  spiritual  influence  which 
we  have  described.  He  concludes  it  to  be  "  the 
Bible's  own  teaching  on  the  subject  of  Inspiration, 
that  everything  good  in  any  book,  person,  or  thing 
is  inspired  ;  and  that  the  value  of  any  inspired  book 
must  be  decided  by  the  extent  of  its  inspiration, 
and  the  importance  of  the  truths  which  it  well  or 
inspiredly  teaches."  Of  course  each  man  is  him- 
self the  judge  of  this  value.  Accordingly,  he  says 
that  "  Milton  and  Shakespeare  and  Bacon,  and 
Canticles  and  the  Apocalypse,  and  the  sermon  on 
the  mount,  and  the  eighth  chapter  to  the  Romans 
are,  in  our  estimation,  all  inspired  ;  but  which  of 
them  is  the  most  valuable  inspired  document,  or 
whether  the  Bible,  as  a  whole,  is  not  incomparably 
more  precious  than  any  other  book,  —  these  are 
questions  that  must  be  decided  by  examining  the 
observable  character  and  tendency  of  each  book, 
and  the  beneficial  effect  that  history  may  show 
that  each  has  produced."  (Macnaught  on  Inspira- 
tion, pp.  192-196.) 

Hence  he  has  no  difficulty  in  discovering  not 
only  books,  but  inspired  books,  in  the  running 
brooks,  sermons  in  stones,  and  good  in  everything. 


NEGATIVE   STATEMENTS   OF   THE  DOCTRINE.      77 

There  is  a  true  inspiration,  he  assures  us,  in  the  in- 
stinct of  the  owl ;  inspiration  is  heard  in  the  rush- 
ing of  the  wind;  it  is  seen  in  the  springing  of  a 
blade  of  grass  ;  it  murmurs  in  the  streams  that 
flow  among  the  hills  ;  the  hinds  of  the  field  calve 
by  inspiration.  And  therefore,  because  there  is  no 
evidence  of  infallibility  attaching  to  these  phenom- 
ena of  nature,  Mr.  Macnaught  argues  that  there 
is  no  such  thing  as  infallibility  attaching  to  the 
words  or  writings  of  God's  inspired  prophets  and 
evangelists.  Hence  a  considerable  part  of  his  book 
is  occupied,  as  are  many  of  the  commentaries  of 
some  German  critics,  in  an  elaborate  attempt  to 
display  the  errors  of  Scripture,  and  to  show  that  to 
a  large  extent  the  Bible,  though  admitted  to  be  in- 
spired, ought  not  to  be  believed  !  Of  what  value  is 
such  inspiration  ?  ^ 

1  An  argument  of  the  same  kind  as  Macnaught's  is  suggested  by 
Harvey  Goodwin  in  the  Hulsean  Lectures  for  1855,  on  the  ground 
of  the  analogy  between  man's  creation  and  the  Bible.  Because 
"  God  breathed  into  his  nostrils  the  breath  of  life,  and  man  became 
a  living  soul  "  (Genesis  ii.  7),  he  affirms,  "an  inspired  work  of  God 
this,  if  ever  there  was  one"  (p.  86).  From  which  he  proceeds  to 
argue  that  it  Is  unwise  and  dangerous  to  infer  infallibility  in  the 
Bible,  when  man,  also  "inspired,"  is  certainly  fallible.  The  words 
employed  in  the  original  for  hxath  of  life  and  spirit  of  life  are  en- 
tirely different,  and  never  confounded.  And  so  the  analogy  breaks 
down  at  the  very  first  step. 


78  BIBLE  DOCTRINE  OF  INSPIRATION. 

E.  The  Inspiration  w^hich  the  Bible  affirms  does  not 
imply  that  those  Twho  enjoyed  it  had  perfect 
Knowledge  on  all  Subjects,  or  on  any  Subject,  but 
only  that  they  had  Infallibility  and  Divine  Author- 
ity in  their  Oilicial  Utterances. 

It  was  limited  to  the  end  for  which  it  was  given, 
limited  by  the  very  nature  of  the  object  in  view, 
viz.  the  communication  of  divine  truth  on  certain 
topics  by  divine  authority.  It  rendered  its  re- 
cipient infallible  in  nothing  else,  and  authoritative 
in  nothing  else.     It  did  not  render  him  omniscient. 

Overlooking  this  obvious  but  important  distinc- 
tion has  led  to  serious  mistakes  on  both  sides  of 
this  controversy.  The  opponents  of  our  doctrine 
of  Inspiration  seem  to  understand  us  to  maintain 
that  inspired  men  were  personally,  absolutely,  and 
universally  infallible  ;  and  they  have  naturally  and 
forcibly  protested  against  such  a  view.  We  agree 
with  them  in  such  a  protest.  But  not  all  the  advo- 
cates of  Inspiration  have  clearly  perceived  the  dis- 
tinction, and  accordingly  some  have  fallen  into 
embarrassment,  and  into  erroneous  and  inconsist- 
ent statements  as  to  this  point. 

Inspiration  had  nothing  to  do  with  Paul's  skill 
or  awkwardness  as  a  tent-maker.  It  did  not  affect 
the  elegance  of  his  delivery  as  a  speaker,  favorably 
or  otherwise.  It  did  not  become  (as  some  imagine 
our  doctrine  to  presuppose)  a  characteristic  in  the 
common  affairs  of  life.  It  did  not  preserve  its  most 
eminent  characters  from  mistakes  in  conduct,  nor 


NEGATIVE  STATEMENTS  OF  THE  DOCTKINE.   79 

exempt  them  from  sinful  feelings  at  different  times, 
and  from  the  constant  need  of  prayer  for  forgiveness, 
and  the  perpetual,  watchful  struggle  against  sin. 

Inspiration  did  not  imply  the  communication  to 
the  man  of  any  truth  other  than  that  which  he  was 
to  impart  on  God's  authority  to  others ;  not  of  all 
truth  on  all  subjects,  nor  even  of  all  that  may  be 
true  on  any  subject.  And  of  course  it  is  not 
maintained  that  it  secured  his  infallibility  on  such 
subjects,  or  at  such  times,  as  he  was  not  called  on 
to  spealv  with  divine  authority.  The  extent  of  the 
inspiration  was  not  necessarily  beyond  that  of  the 
revelation ;  it  might  even  stop  short  of  it,  as  when 
things  were  made  known  to  Paul  which  he  was  not 
permitted  to  utter.     (2  Corinthians  xii.  4.) 

Again,  inspired  men  did  not  know  the  full  mean- 
ing of  what  they  themselves  taught.  We  are  ex- 
pressly informed  that  the  prophets  "  sought  and 
searched  diligently  "  concerniug  the  very  salvation 
which  they  foretold,  "  searching  what  time,  or  what 
manner  of  time  the  Spirit  that  was  in  them  did 
point  unto."  They  ministered  not  to  themselves, 
but  to  those  of  later  days.     (1  Peter  i.  10-12.) 

This  idea  may  be  illustrated,  in  some  degree,  by 
the  case  of  a  telegraph  operator,  who  can  accurately 
transmit  messages  wliich  he  does  not  understand. 
His  apprehension  of  its  meaning  has  nothing  to  do 
with  the  exactness  of  the  transcript  received  at  the 
other  end  of  tlie  wire,  or  with  the  clear  interpreta- 
tion of  the  cipher  in  which  it  is  conveyed. 


80  BIBLE   DOCTRINE   OF  INSPIRATION. 

Accordingly,  inspired  men,  who  were  the  organs 
of  communications  concerning  the  coming  glory  of 
Christ  and  of  his  kingdom,  were  still  allowed  to  die 
without  the  sight  ;  and  not  only  so,  but  without 
fully  understanding  the  things  they  spoke.  But 
they  waited  for  those  things,  delighted  in  them, 
longed  for  them,  desired  to  look  into  them.  They 
ministered  to  men  of  a  later  dispensation,  to  whom 
the  key  was  given  by  the  Saviour's  own  hand  to 
unlock  the  dark  sayings  of  their  predecessors,  so 
that  it  could  at  last  be  clearly  discerned  that  from 
beginning  to  end  "  the  testimony  of  Jesus  iS  the 
spirit  of  prophecy."     (Revelation  xix.  10.) 

A  man  might  grow  in  knowledge,  though  in- 
spired. Peter  seems  to  have  done  so  in  regard  to 
the  meaning  of  Joel's  prophecy.  He  had  been  long 
familiar  with  it,  no  doubt ;  but  apparently  he  did 
not  understand  it  till  he  received  the  fulness  of  the 
Spirit  on  the  day  of  Pentecost.  Nor  did  he  even 
then  completely  apprehend  the  relation  of  the  Gen- 
tiles to  the  Church  of  Christ.  His  understanding 
of  that  matter  was  made  more  full  and  clear  by  the 
communications  at  Joppa  and  Cassarea.  Not  only 
might  one  know  more  than  another,  yet  not  be  any 
more  truly  inspired,  for  there  are  no  degrees  in 
infallibility ;  but  the  same  man  at  one  time  would 
know  more  than  he  himself  knew  at  an  earlier 
time.  Thus  there  were  all  diversities  of  gifts,  but 
the  same  Spirit. 


NEGATIVE  STATEMENTS  OF  THE  DOCTRINE.   81 

F.  Inspiration  did  not  imply  Exemption  from  Error 
in  Conduct,  nor  great  Elevation  in  Spiritual  At- 
tainments. 

This  is  true  also  of  Revelation,  as  well  as  of  In- 
spiration. Thus  Abimelech,  as  well  as  Abraham, 
received  divine  communications,  i.  e.  had  revela- 
tions given ;  Pharaoh  was  thus  favored,  as  well  as 
Joseph ;  Sarali  and  Hagar,  as  well  as  Huldah  and 
Hannah  :  though  the  former  were  not  instructed 
to  utter  authoritatively,  or  to  record  what  they  re- 
ceived. 

So  others  besides  pious  men  were  sometimes, 
though  rarely,  authorized  to  speak  for  God,  i.  e. 
were  inspired.  Balaam  is  a  striking  example  of 
this ;  seeing  the  truth,  declaring  the  future,  yet 
dying  an  enemy  of  Israel,  fighting  and  plotting 
basely  against  the  very  triumph  he  had  foretold. 
So,  too,  the  old  prophet  in  Bethel,  and  the  disobe- 
dient prophet  that  had  come  out  of  Judah  (1  Kings 
xiii.),  and  Caiaphas,  who  spake  "not  of  himself" 
(i.  e.  not  from  himself,  not  of  his  own  suggestion), 
but  prophesied  as  to  Christ's  dying  for  the  people 
(John  ii.  51). 

John  and  Paul,  though  perhaps  more  eminently 
pious  and  zealous  than  others  of  the  Apostles,  had 
no  higher  measure  of  authority  than  other  inspired 
men.  Excellence  of  character  was  not  alone  a 
sufficient  attestation  of  divine  authority  to  speak, 
nor  was  imperfection  of  character  a  disproof  of 
one's  gemiine  inspiration. 

6 


82  BIBLE   DOCTraNE   OF  INSPIRATION. 

The  most  eminent  and  holy  of  the  inspired  men 
were  not  free  from  sin,  and  in  some  cases  from 
conspicuous  and  glaring  sin.  The  names  of  Moses, 
David,  and  Peter  at  once  occur  to  the  mind,  and 
make  it  unnecessary  to  discuss  this  point  further. 

G.     Inspiration  is  not  inconsistent  -writh  Mistakes  in  the 
subsequent  Transcription  of  the  Sacred  Writings. 

The  inspiration  which  we  affirm  is  that  of  the 
original  text  of  Scripture,  and  therefore  does  not 
deny  that  there  may  have  been  errors  in  copying. 
"We  have  no  assurance,  nor  the  slightest  reason  to 
suppose,  that  the  supernatural  guardianship  which 
insured  the  correctness  of  the  original  record  was 
continued  and  renewed  every  time  anybody  under- 
took to  make  a  copy  of  it.  The  accuracy  of  our 
present  copies  is  a  separate  question,  dependent  on 
the  ordinary  rules  of  historical  evidence  in  such 
matters.  That  is  what  is  examined  in  the  science 
of  Text  Criticism. 

There  has  been  indeed  a  providential  guardian- 
ship over  the  Word,  by  which  it  has  been  preserved 
remarkably  incorrupt,  and  singularly  attested  as 
being  substantially  the  same  that  proceeded  from 
the  original  writers.  The  results  of  the  Herculean 
labors  of  modern  critics  make  it  evident  that,  in 
about  a  dozen  important  passages,  and  in  very 
many  unimportant  ones,  there  is  reasonable  ground 
for  correcting  the  commonly  received  text.  In  a 
number  of  others,  there  is  room  for  discussion  as  to 


NEGATIVE   STATEMENTS   OF   THE   DOCTRINE.      83 

the  true  reading.  But  when  all  these  known  errors 
are  corrected,  and  all  those  doubtful  readhigs  are 
set  aside,  it  is  evident  that  there  is  no  change  as 
to  any  leading  doctrine  or  fact  of  the  Gospel. 

The  difference  is  somewhat  as  if  out  of  a  bucket 
of  rain-water  from  the  cistern  a  teaspoonful  were 
taken,  and  then  its  place  supplied  by  another  tea- 
spoonful  of  river-water.  The  contents  of  the  bucket 
would  be  practically  unaltered. 

If  it  be  said,  that  these  are  very  trifling  and  in- 
significant results  to  be  obtained  by  all  the  labors  of 
the  eminent  text  critics  who  have  been  toiling  for 
centuries,  —  of  Bcngel  and  Griesbach,  of  Tischen- 
dorf  and  Tregelles,  of  Westcott  and  Hort,  —  we 
reply  that  it  is  no  trifle  to  be  assured  upon  such 
competent  authority,  after  so  painstaking  an  in- 
vestigation, that  the  variations  from  the  originals, 
or  from  the  manuscript  copies  nearest  to  the  origi- 
nals, are  so  slight.  Tlius  it  is  that  the'plain  reader 
may  eat  his  Gospel  bread  in  peace,  undisturbed  by 
the  apprehension  that  chaff  or  poison  may  have 
been  somewhere  ground  up  with  the  wheat. 

It  is  objected  that  some  adherents  of  the  strict 
doctrine  of  Inspiration  used  to  affirm  the  absolute 
immaculatencss  of  the  modern  copies  of  the  Scrip- 
ture, Hebrew  points  and  all ;  and  that  they  were 
logically  bound  to  do  so  ;  that  no  other  ground  is 
consistent  or  tenable. 

We  do  not  deny  tliat  there  have  been  some  wild 
and  unfounded  assertions  on  the  subject,  just  as 


84  BIBLE   DOCTRINE   OF  INSPIRATION. 

there  is  even  now,  with  some  ignorant  persons,  an 
assumption  of  the  infallibility  and  equality  with 
the  original  of  some  particular  translation,  as  the 
Vulgate,  or  King  James's,  or  Luther's.  But  we 
are  not  responsible  for  such  statements;  and  they 
are  by  no  means  implied  in  our  doctrine,  as  will  be 
shown  when  we  come  to  consider  this  topic  in  our 
Third  Part,  Objections  to  Inspiration. 

It  is  objected,  that,  if  we  concede  errors  in  the 
commonly  received  text,  and  the  possibility  that 
still  other  passages  are  now  doubtful  and  may  be 
found  erroneous,  this  concession  weakens  greatly 
the  argument  for  infallible  inspiration.  "  Why  so 
strenuous  for  exact  inspiration  of  the  words,  when 
you  admit  there  may  have  been  errors  of  transcrip- 
tion ?     What  do  you  gain  ?  " 

We  answer,  we  gain  all  the  difference  there  is 
between  an  inspired  and  an  uninspired  original ;  all 
the  difference  between  a  document  truly  divine  and 
authoritative  to  begin  with  —  though  the  copies  or 
translations  may  have  in  minute  particulars  varied 
from  it  —  and  a  document  faulty  and  unreliable  at 
the  outset,  and  never  really  divine. 

H.  Inspiration  does  not  imply  the  Truth  of  Opinions  or 
Sayings  stated  in  Scripture,  but  not  sanctioned. 

There  is  an  obvious  distinction  between  what  is 
recorded  and  what  is  taught  or  enjoined.  Errors 
may  be  stated,  only  to  be  condemned  and  refuted. 
This  position  is  so  nearly  self-evident  that  it  is  hard 


NEGATIVE  STATEMENTS  OF  THE  DOCTRINE.   85 

to  make  it  plainer  than  the  simple  statement;  yet 
it  has  been  often  and  strangely  overlooked. 

The  Bible  might  have  presented  God  as  the  only 
speaker,  —  all  the  words  His  words,  all  the  acts 
His  acts.  On  the  other  hand,  it  presents  a  record 
which  introduces  men,  bad  and  good,  angels,  even 
Satan,  speaking  and  acting  according  to  their 
own  nature.  It  gives  history,  dialogue,  reasoning, 
poetry,  prayer.  It  is  inspired  as  a  record  of  these 
things,  but  records  them  as  the  opinions  or  sayings 
of  those  to  whom  they  are  ascribed,  —  not  of  God, 
unless  it  is  in  some  way  indicated  that  they  are  by 
authority  of  God. 

Thus  the  serpent  says,  "Ye  shall  not  surely 
die "  ;  the  fool  says  in  his  heart,  "  There  is  no 
God  " ;  the  wicked  say,  "  It  is  a  vain  thing  to  serve 
God."  The  Bible  records  these  as  the  lies  of  those 
who  uttered  them. 

The  same  thing  is  true  of  every  history,  inspired 
and  uninspired.  D'Aubigne's  Reformation  gives 
the  sentiments  of  Papists  and  of  Reformers,  the 
cruel  and  false  decisions  of  the  former,  as  well  as 
the  heroic  and  truthful  utterances  of  the  latter. 
Did  any  mortal  ever  doubt  which  of  the  two  he 
sanctioned  or  approved  ? 

The  Book  of  Job  contains  a  protracted  discus- 
sion between  Job  and  three  of  his  friends,  as  to  the 
great  mysteries  of  God's  providential  government. 
The  doctrine  and  spirit  of  the  three  friends,  Eli- 
phaz,  Bildad,  and  Zophar,  are  distinctly  stated   as 


86  BIBLE  DOCTRINE   OF  INSPIRATION. 

their,  and  not  God's,  view  of  the  matter.  They 
are  clearly  and  distinctly  condemned  by  the  Al- 
mighty himself,  as  not  right,  so  that  His  wrath 
was  kindled  against  them  (Job  xlii.  7).  Yet  it  is 
from  this  book  that  so  great  a  man  as  Coleridge 
attempts  to  draw  an  argument  against  the  doctrine 
of  Inspiration.  "  What ! "  says  he ;  "  were  the 
hollow  truisms,  the  imsufficing  half-truths,  the  false 
assumptions  and  malignant  insinuations  of  the  su- 
pei:cilious  bigots  who  corruptly  defended  the  truth, 
—  were  the  impressive  facts,  the  piercing  outcries, 
the  pathetic  appeals,  and  the  close  and  powerful 
reasonings  with  which  the  poor  sufferer  (smarting 
at  once  from  his  wounds  and  from  the  oil  of  vitriol 
which  the  orthodox  liars  for  God  were  dropping 
into  them)  impatiently,  but  nobly  and  uprightly, 
controverted  this  truth,  while  in  will  and  spirit  he 
clung  to  it,  —  were  both  dictated  by  an  infallible 
intelligence  ? "  He  objects,  and  justly,  against  the 
manner  in  which  both  classes  of  passages  are  indis- 
criminately "  recited,  quoted,  appealed  to,  preached 
upon,  by  the  7'outiniers  of  desk  and  pulpit "  ;  but 
this  heedless  misuse  and  perversion  of  Scripture 
must  not  be  set  to  the  account  of  the  doctrine  of 
Inspiration,  which  authorizes  no  such  disregard  of 
plain  language  and  of  common  sense. 

In  like  manner,  we  find  in  Scripture  quotations 
from  various  sources  or  documents.  For  example, 
in  Acts  we  have  a  copy  of  the  celebrated  letter 
of  Claudius  Lysias,  and  a  report  of  the  plausible 


NEGATIVE   STATEMENTS   OF   THE  DOCTRINE.      87 

speech  of  the  orator  Tertullus,  —  both  remarkable 
for  their  skill  in  the  art  of  "  putting  things,"  and 
their  quiet  assumption  of  things  that  were  most 
probably  not  so.  Does  the  Bible  indorse  the  truth- 
fulness of  what  is  asserted  in  these  documents,  or 
simply  present  these  as  what  Lysias  wrote  and 
what  Tertullus  said  ?  ^ 

1  Inspiration,  as  we  have  repeatedly  had  occasion  to  say,  left  the 
inspired  historians  under  the  power  and  regulation  of  the  same  laws 
and  influences  that  guide  other  authors  in  their  compositions,  with 
the  single  exception  of  supernatural ly  preserving  them  from  error. 
It  is  quite  compatible,  then,  with  the  free  development  of  the  in- 
dividuality of  the  sacred  penmen  as  authors,  and  with  their  using 
for  the  purposes  of  their  authorship  the  means  and  the  materials 
and  the  helps  which  other  authors  use  in  composing  their  produc- 
tions. It  is  compatible  with  using  their  own  eyesight,  and  narrat- 
ing what  they  saw,  if  spectators  of  the  events  they  had  to  chronicle. 
It  is  compatible  with  searching  out  the  facts  and  studying  the 
reports  of  other  men,  and  the  traditions  handed  down,  if  through 
such  means  they  might  have  perfect  knowledge  of  the  events  re- 
corded. It  is  compatible  with  adopting,  by  means  of  quotation 
from  other  authors,  or  reference  to  existing  documents,  the  facts 
they  had  to  narrate,  if  taught  by  supernatural  revelation  to  do  so, 
for  the  purposes  of  their  composition.  There  is  nothing  in  all  this 
inconsistent  with  the  supernatural  inspiration  of  God  present  and 
co-operating  with  them  in  their  work  ;  unless,  indeed,  it  is  believed 
that  the  divine  and  the  human  co-operation  in  all  cases  and  under 
all  circumstances  is  impossible.  —  Bannerman,  535. 

That  every  word  of  Scripture  has  been  inspired,  does  not  imply 
that  every  speech  or  sentiment  recorded  there  should  be  inspired. 
The  letter  of  Claudius  Lysias  was  not  inspired,  but  it  is  inserted 
in  the  Scriptures  by  inspiration,  and  for  a  purpose  useful  for  the 
edification  of  the  people  of  God.  —  Alexander  Carson,  V.  83. 


88  BIBLE  DOCTRINE   OF  INSPIRATION. 

I.  Inspiration   does    not    imply   the   Propriety   of  Ac- 
tions recorded,  but  not  approved. 

In  narrating  the  actions  of  men,  tliree  or  four 
different  courses  are  adopted  in  Scripture. 

a.  Sometimes  actions  are  recorded  with  express 
approval.  As  to  them,  of  course,  there  is  no  ques- 
tion now. 

h.  Sometimes  they  are  recorded,  and  distinctly 
condemned.  This  is  usually  in  the  immediate  con- 
nection, so  as  to  leave  no  room  for  mistake  or 
misconception.  So  David's  great  sin  in  the  matter 
of  Uriah  (2  Samuel  xi.  2-27),  Peter's  dissembling 
at  Antioch  (Galatians  ii.  11-14),  and  his  denial  of 
our  Lord  (Matthew  xxvi.  69-75).  Sometimes  the 
act  is  recorded,  and  the  censure  is  more  distinctly 
given  afterwards,  as  in  the  case  of  the  sin  of  Moses 
and  Aaron  at  Kadesh  (Numbers  xx.  10-12,  24  ; 
Deuteronomy  iii.  26  ;   xxxii.  50-52). 

c.  The  sins  both  of  good  men  and  of  bad  men 
are  often  recorded,  without  any  distinct  censure 
except  by  the  consequences  indicated  in  the  history. 
The  greatest  crimes  and  the  highest  virtues  are 
described,  often  without  a  word  of  eulogy  or  blame, 
to  indicate  the  emotions  of  the  narrator  with  re- 
spect to  them.  Yet  the  judgment  of  God  as  to 
them  is  indubitable. 

Abraham's  faith  is  mentioned,  sometimes  with 
and  sometimes  without  special  commendation.  His 
lack  of  faith  at  other  times  is  recorded,  and  the 


NEGATIVE  STATEMENTS  OF  THE  DOCTRINE.   89 

condemnation,  though  not  distinct  or  immediately 
expressed,  is  sufficiently  indicated  by  the  resulting 
events.  A  still  clearer  case  of  this  kind  is  in  the 
cluster  of  sins  in  Isaac's  misgoverned  and  divided 
family,  where  the  evil  of  each  of  the  parties  in  the 
transaction  is  vividly  brought  to  view  in  the  provi- 
dential retribution  which  is  subsequently  detailed. 

d.  Sometimes  it  is  left  doubtful  whether  actions 
so  recorded  are  blamed  or  approved.  Some  of  the 
principal  instances  of  this  sort  will  come  up  for 
consideration  in  the  reply  to  objections,  in  Part 
Third ;  cases  in  which  it  is  difficult  to  decide 
whether  the  actions  were  not  wrong,  or  were  not 
commended,  such  as  Jael's  slaying  Sisera,  Jeph- 
thah's  offering  his  daughter  to  the  Lord,  Rahab's 
concealing  the  spies,  etc.  But  all  that  is  impor- 
tant for  us  now  to  settle  is  the  principle,  obvious 
and  undeniable,  that  the  Bible  is  not  accountable 
for  the  propriety  of  actions  recorded,  but  not  ap- 
proved. 


CHAPTER  V. 

POSITIVE    STATEMENT    OF    THE    DOCTRINE   OF 
INSPIRATION. 

THIS  may  be   briefly  comprehended   in  three 
points :  — 

1.  The  Bible  is  truly  the  Word  of  God,  having 
both  infallible  truth  and  divine  authority  in  all  that 
it  affirms  or  enjoins. 

2.  The  Bible  is  truly  the  production  of  men. 
It  is  marked  by  all  the  evidences  of  human  author- 
ship as  clearly  and  certainly  as  any  other  book 
that  was  ever  written  by  men. 

3.  This  twofold  authorship  extends  to  every 
part  of  Scripture,  and  to  the  language  as  well  as  to 
the  general  ideas  expressed. 

Or  it  may  be  summed  up  in  one  single  statement : 
The  whole  Bible  is  truly  God's  Word  written  by 
men. 


PROOFS    OF    INSPIRATION. 


part  ^econtJ. 

PROOFS  OF  INSPIRATION. 


CHAPTER  I. 

PRESUMPTIVE   ARGUMENT   FOR   INSPIRATION. 

IN  our  whole  argument  revelation  will  be  assumed. 
It  is  proved  by  the  general  evidences  of  Chris- 
tianity, and  is  admitted  by  most,  if  not  all,  of  those 
with  whom  we  are  now  discussing.  Inspiration, 
as  heretofore  distinguished  from  revelation,  is  the 
point  to  be  proved. 

It  is  not  incredible,  not  impossible,  but  likely, 
that  God,  in  giving  a  real  revelation  to  man,  would 
inspire  it ;  that  is,  control,  protect  from  error,  and 
authorize  its  utterance  and  its  record. 

1.  This  we  argue,  first,  from  the  nature  of  God 
and  man,  and  the  relation  between  them.  Suppos- 
ing that  tliere  is  a  God,  infinitely  wise,  holy,  and 
good,  who  loves  the  rebellious  creatures  that  hj^ve 
strayed  into  darkness,  misery,  and  sin,  and  who 
desires  to  offer  them  redemption,  it  is  an  object 
infinitely  worthy  of  such  a  Being  that  He  should 


94  BIBLE  DOCTRINE   OF  INSPIRATION. 

give  tliem  clear,  accurate,  and  authoritative  infor- 
mation as  to  truth  and  duty. 

We  are  not  competent  to  judge  of  the  circum- 
stances and  times  He  might  adopt,  nor  of  the  form 
or  amount  of  communications  that  would  be  best ; 
but  we  might  certainly  expect  that  they  would  be 
autJienticated  as  coming  from  Him,  and  as  being 
His  message  of  love  and  light.  And,  while  we  could 
not  presume  to  decide  in  advance  what  subjects 
such  a  revelation  should  touch,  or  how  fully  they 
should  be  treated,  we  would  fairly  have  reason  to 
expect  that  on  whatever  subjects  it  did  touch  no 
error  should  be  imparted.  This  much  we  should 
naturally  expect  even  of  a  candid  and  judicious  man, 
endeavoring  to  do  us  good,  and  guide  us  right. 

If  the  truth  was  committed,  not  to  merely 
"  earthen  vessels,"  but  to  vessels  of  a  tainted  or 
poisonous  material,  so  that  infusion  would  corrupt  or 
injure  what  was  placed  therein ;  or  if  the  message 
was  communicated  by  men  who  stated  simply  the 
result  of  their  own  observation,  or  used  the  utmost  of 
their  native  ability,  reasoning  out  as  best  they  could, 
unaided,  what  would  be  useful  for  man  ; — in  either 
case,  it  would  hardly  comport  with  what  might 
reasonably  be  expected.    It  would  not  be  like  God. 

2.  The  force  of  this  argument  is  increased, 
when  we  reflect  upon  the  permanence  and  extent 
of  the  object  in  view.  It  is  evident,  upon  opening 
the  Scriptures,  that  they  were  designed,  not  for  one 
age,  but  for  all  the  ages,  books  of  the  times,  but 


PRESUMPTIVE  ARGUMENT  FOR  INSPIRATION.     95 

for  all  time  ;  that  while  given,  almost  if  not  quite 
exclusively,  to  one  race  and  nation,  they  were  given 
for  all  races  of  mankind,  and  all  periods  ;  that  even 
tliose  things  obviously  local  and  apparently  tempo- 
rary were,  as  truly  as  other  parts,  "  written  for  our 
admonition,  upon  whom  the  ends  of  the  ages  are 
come  "  (1  Corinthians  x.  11). 

If  a  man  has  made  some  great  discovery  in  science, 
or  has  devised  some  invention  which  he  thinks  will 
be  of  value  to  mankind,  he  is  careful  to  have  it  accu- 
rately described  and  faithfully  preserved.  He  would 
not  leave  its  transmission  to  haphazard,  without  su- 
pervision, to  the  chances  of  blunders  and  misappre- 
hension by  those  who  are  to  convey  the  knowledge 
of  it  to  others ;  and  even  if,  of  necessity,  he  must 
use  some  imperfect  instruments  or  mediums  for  ex- 
tending information,  he  would  provide  a  permanent 
model  or  standard  of  comparison,  by  which  their 
erroneous  or  defective  statements  might  always  be 
corrected.  Precisely  this  is  what  our  view  supposes 
to  have  been  done  by  our  Heavenly  Father. 

3.  Additional  weight  is  given  to  this  presump- 
tive argument  by  considering  the  other  supernatural 
manifestations  or  acts  connected  with  the  giving  of 
the  kScriptures,  and  recognized  by  most  of  those  who 
differ  with  us  as  to  the  doctrine  of  Inspiration. 

According  to  our  doctrine,  there  are  three  stages 
of  the  supernatural  in  this  matter  :  — 

a.  God  communicating  to  the  prophet  the  truth, 
—  Revelation. 


96  BIBLE  DOCTRINE  OF  INSPIRATION. 

h.  God  controlling  the  record  or  utterance  of  this 
revelation  by  the  propliet,  —  Inspiration. 

c.  God  attesting  it  by  divine  signs  so  as  to  con- 
firm the  authority  of  the  prophet  as  a  divine  mes- 
senger, —  Evidential  Miracles. 

Of  these,  the  first  and  third  are  admitted  and 
contended  for  by  our  brethren,  from  "whom  we 
differ.  They,  as  much  as  we,  afiirm  revelation  and 
evidential  miracles.  Now,  if  we  admit  the  super- 
natural at  all,  in  giving  man  the  knowledge  of  re- 
ligious truth  and  duty,  it  is  no  more  difficult  to 
believe  that  enough  was  done  to  secure  completely 
the  result,  than  to  allow  that  there  was  a  miracle 
at  the  beginning  of  the  process,  and  a  miracle  at 
the  close,  while  in  the  midst  the  link  of  connection 
was  broken  by  the  intervention  of  uncontrolled 
human  frailty  and  the  liability  to  mistake. 

If  God  works  a  supernatural  wonder  in  giving 
revelation,  and  others  to  authenticate  it,  then  it  is 
not  improbable,  but  likely,  that  He  would  exercise 
such  control,  and  give  such  supernatural  aid  as 
might  be  necessary  to  secure  the  accurate  transfer- 
ence of  the  revelation  into  human  speech,  so  as  to 
make  it  just  what  He  meant  it  should  be.  If,  on 
the  other  hand,  revelation  had  been  committed  to 
mere  oral  tradition,  without  any  writing,  it  might 
be  seriously  corrupted,  or  might  even  perish  within 
two  generations.  Or  if  intrusted  to  unaided  human 
record,  it  would  have  had  neither  unerring  truth  nor 
absolute  divine  authority  at  the  very  first. 


PRESUMPTIVE   ARGUMENT   FOR   INSPIRATION.     97 

If  the  plan  of  the  Almighty  was,  by  means  of  one 
or  several  men,  to  brhig  all  nations  into  nearness 
"with  liimself  and  acquaintance  with  his  truth,  it  is 
reasonable  to  believe  that  He  would  not  only  super- 
intend the  process  of  their  receiving,  but  also  that 
of  their  imparting,  the  sacred  truth.  If  the  divine 
action  ceased  with  communicating  the  revelation 
to  them,  then  we  have  not  a  revelation  at  all,  but 
only  a  human  account  of  a  divine  revelation.  Ac- 
cording to  that  view,  there  tvas  a  revelation,  but  it 
perished  as  such,  with  the  men  to  whom  it  was  im- 
parted, and  all  that  the  world  has  is  the  fallible 
impression  it  made  on  their  minds,  or  their  fallible 
account  of  that  impression. 

The  admission  of  a  miraculous  revelation  not 
ouly  thus  creates  the  probability  that  all  further 
steps  would  be  taken  that  are  necessary  to  secure 
the  end  in  view,  but  also  presents  a  sufficient  an- 
swer to  those  wlio  object  to  inspiration,  because  it 
implies  the  supernatural.  A  first  step  of  this  kind 
having  been  actually  taken,  it  is  unreasonable  to 
allege  that  another  is  impossible  or  incredible. 

4.  A  further  presumptive  argument  for  the  In- 
spiration of  the  Scriptures  may  be  gathered  from 
what  we  know  of  the  character  and  circumstances 
of  the  writers. 

How  could  these  books  have  been  written  by  such 
men,  in  such  surroundings,  without  divine  aid  ? 
When  we  consider  the  subjects  discussed,  the  ideas 
presented,  — ;  so  hostile  not  only  to  their  native  pre- 

7 


98  BIBLE   DOCTKINE   OF   INSPIRATION, 

judiceSjbut  to  the  general  sentiments  then  prevalent 
with  the  wisest  of  mankind,  —  the  whole  system  of 
principles  interwoven  everywhere  with  history  and 
poetry  and  promise,  as  well  as  minute  wonders  and 
single  excellences  of  the  word,  —  our  minds  are 
constrained  to  acknowledge  this  as  God's  Book, 
in  a  high  and  peculiar  sense. 

If  we  begin  with  the  Pentateuch,  it  is  evident 
that  its  opening  pages  must  be  either  the  floating 
tradition  of  human  conjectures  and  guesses  at  the 
origin  of  all  things,  or  else  the  record  of  a  revela- 
tion ;  for  the  events  themselves  occurred  confessedly 
before  the  creation  of  man.  No  human  testimony 
was  possible,  in  order  to  describe  what  happened 
before  human  existence.  And  the  altei-native  is  to 
regard  the  account  of  the  Creation  as  a  mere  hu- 
man guess,  or  else  as  a  divine  revelation :  in  the 
one  case,  of  no  authority  whatever ;  in  the  other, 
of  complete  authority. 

Whence  could  Moses  have  obtained  that  sublime 
theology,  that  condensed  summary  of  ethics,  those 
marvellous  precepts  ?  Certainly  not  from  the  Egyp- 
tian sources,  degraded  by  polytheism  and  human 
degeneracy,  with  which  he  was  familiar  by  his  edu- 
cation ;  nor  from  the  Babylonish  traditions  which 
doubtless  may  have  come  down  to  him  through  the 
family  of  Abraham  :  for  a  stream  can  rise  no  higher 
than  its  source  ;  and  he  towers  peerless  and  unap- 
]ir()achable  above  all  the  sages  and  lawgivers  of 
antiipiity. 


PRESUMPTIVE  ARGUMENT  FOR  INSPIRATION.     99 

The  Psalms  are  so  far  above  the  sacred  Ijrlc 
compositions,  not  only  of  any  contemporary  era, 
but  of  all  subsequent  times,  as  to  leave  no  room 
for  the  fancy  that  these  are  the  foam  that  crested 
the  waves  of  Hebrew  poetic  passion,  the  utterances 
of  mere  national  or  individual  longings,  in  one  of 
the  narrowest  and  least  cultured  of  the  peoples  of 
the  ancient  world.  Strange  that  these  secluded 
Hebrews,  who  scarcely  ever  passed  or  looked  be- 
yond their  own  contracted  region,  unfamiliar  with 
art  and  unpolished  by  contact  with  the  literature 
of  other  nations,  should  have  given  utterance  and 
melody  to  the  deepest  feelings  of  universal  hu- 
man nature  !  Strange  that  the  words  which  linger 
most  tenderly  and  solemnly  on  our  lips,  beside  the 
couches  of  the  dying,  or  at  the  graves  of  our  dead, 
are  the  words  of  Moses,  the  Man  of  God,  or  of  Da- 
vid, the  sweet  Psalmist  of  Israel,  —  of  men  who 
lived  thousands  of  years  ago,  and  belonged  to  what 
is  often  alleged  to  be  the  most  unsympathetic  and 
isolated  of  all  races !  Is  there  not  reason  in  the 
claim  that  the  Spirit  of  the  Lord  spake  by  them, 
and  His  word  was  in  their  tongue  ? 

In  the  Prophets  of  the  Old  Testament  we  find  no 
comparison,  but  a  marked  contrast,  with  the  sooth- 
sayers and  wizards  of  antiquity,  or  of  to-day.  Tliey 
were  not  the  paid  guardians  of  pretended  oracles, 
ready  for  money  to  issue  their  ambiguous  responses, 
concealing  their  unhallowed  mysteries  in  suspicious 
darkness,    and    living  in  luxury  on  the  wages   of 


100  BIBLE  DOCTRINE  OF  INSPIRATION. 

superstition  and  vice.  Their  rewards  were  more 
frequently  contempt,  derision,  imprisonment,  liatred, 
and  death.  Their  announcements  were  made  in 
palaces  and  cities,  openly  and  unshrinkingly,  at  the 
gate  of  the  temple,  in  the  high  places  of  the  field, 
without  the  concealment  or  caution  of  conscious 
imposture,  or  the  studied  ambiguity  which  hides 
real  ignorance  under  deceptive  Avords.  So  much 
might  be  said,  even  apart  from  the  foreknowledge 
of  contingent  events  which  is  implied  in  predictive 
prophecy,  and  which  certainly  required  divine  aid. 
But  if  the  reality  of  the  numerous  minute  as  well 
as  more  extended  predictions  and  fulfilments  be 
conceded,  there  can  be  no  room  for  question  as  to 
the  divine  authority  and  influence  under  which  they 
spake  and  wrote.  Obviously,  what  they  delivered 
was  not  merely  for  the  men  of  their  time,  but  to 
encourage,  guide,  and  sustain  those  of  after  days  ^ 
and  this  could  not  be  available,  unless  both  the  pre- 
cise expressions  employed,  and  the  record  of  them, 
were  under  a  divine  superintendence  and  control. 

If  now  we  pass  to  the  New  Testament,  the  argu- 
ment becomes  even  stronger.^    We  are  indeed  in  the 

1  B.  F.  Westcott,  after  speaking  of  the  ordinary  methods  of  proof 
of  Inspiration,  forcibly  says  :  "On  the  other  hand  we  may  examine 
the  character  and  objects  of  the  books  themselves,  and  put  together 
the  various  facts  which  appear  to  indicate  in  them  the  presence  of 
more  tlian  human  authority  and  wisdom,  no  less  in  the  simplicity 
and  rudeness  of  their  general  form  than  in  the  subtle  harmony 
and  marvellous  connection  of  their  various  elements.  And  if  this 
metliod  of  proof  is  less  direct  and  definite  than  the  other,  —  if  it 
calls  for  calm  patience,  and  compels  thought  in  each  ini^uirer,  —  it 


PRESUMPTIVE  ARGUMENT  FOR  INSPIRATION.    101 

Augustan  age  of  Rome,  but  in  a  nook  of  tlie  em- 
pire where  the  culture  of  that  polished  period  has 
scarcely  penetrated,  and  dealing  with  writers  whose 
sentences  have  not  been  framed  on  the  models  of 
classic  Greece  or  Rome.  In  the  land  of  darkness, 
Galilee  of  the  Gentiles,  a  great  light  has  suddenly- 
arisen.  What  but  inspiration  could  have  lifted  these 
men  above  their  sphere,  and  given  their  writings 
the  characteristics  by  which  they  have  dominated, 
moulded,  and  quickened  the  thought  of  the  world, 
in  its  most  thoughtful  and  cultured  races,  from  that 
day  to  this  ?    As  Dr.  E.  Henderson  well  says :  — 

"  How  otherwise  can  we  account  for  the  fact  that 
persons  of  ordinary  talent,  untutored  in  the  schools 
of  philosophy,  dull  of  apprehension,  pusillanimous  in 

is  also  broader  and  more  elastic,  capable  of  infinite  extensions  and 
applications.  Nor  is  it  less  powerful  even  while  it  is  less  cogent. 
To  many  perhaps  the  inward  assurance  which  it  creates  is  more 
satisfactory  than  the  rigid  deductions  of  direct  argument.  The 
unlimited  multiplication  of  convergent  presumptions  and  analogies 
builds  up  a  strong  and  sure  conviction,  possessing  a  moral  force 
which  can  never  belong  to  a  mere  formal  proof,  even  where  the 
premises  are  necessary  truths. 

"  It  is  in  the  perfection  and  oneness  of  their  social  teaching,  so 
to  speak,  that  the  strongest  internal  proof  of  the  plenary  Inspira- 
tion of  the  Gospels  is  to  be  found.  .  .  .  The  manner  in  which  these 
questions  —  the  foundation  doctrines  of  a  Christian  community  — 
are  treated  by  the  Evangelists  is  such  as  to  exclude  the  idea  of  a 
mere  personal  intuition,  for  that  leaves  no  room  for  those  combi- 
nations in  which  the  fulness  of  the  Gospel  lies.  However  far  one 
Evangelist  might  have  been  led  by  the  laws  of  his  own  mind,  it 
can  only  be  by  the  introduction  of  a  higher  power  that  four  un- 
consciously combine  to  rear  from  different  sides  a  harmonious  and 
perfect  fabric  of  Christian  truth."  —  B.  F.  Westcott,  Introduction 
to  the  Study  of  the  Gospels,  pp.  20-26. 


102  BIBLE   DOCTRINE   OF   INSPIRATION. 

spirit,  narrow  in  their  opinions,  secular  in  their  hopes 
and  strongly  imbued,  with  national  prepossessions, 
should  all  at  once  have  displayed  the  most  extraordi- 
nary mental  energy,  a  superiority  to  every  earthly 
consideration,  a  profound  acquaintance  with  truths  of 
the  most  sublime  character,  and  of  the  deepest  inter- 
est to  the  whole  human  species,  and  an  expansion  of 
benevolence  which  embraced  every  nation  and  every 
human  being  on  the  face  of  the  globe  ?  To  the  opera- 
tion of  what  causes,  within  the  compass  of  those  prin- 
ciples of  action  Avhich  govern  mankind,  are  we  to 
ascribe  the  sudden  and  entire  transformation  under- 
gone by  the  plain,  illiterate  fishermen  of  Galilee,  and 
the  bigoted  and  zealous  disciple  of  Gamaliel  ?  "  —  Hen- 
derson on  Inspiration,  p.  219. 

Whence  could  these  four  Evangelists,  so  diverse 
in  their  mental  peculiarities,  have  derived  the  mar- 
vellously unique  picture  which  they  have  presented 
of  the  historical  Christ,  except  from  its  being  a 
reality  ?  No  writer  of  fiction  has  ever  succeeded 
in  so  combining  the  most  apparently  incompatible 
characteristics  into  a  harmonious  whole.  And  how 
could  they,  by  unaided  memory,  after  fifty  or  even 
twenty  years,  have  furnished  the  incidents  and  the 
discourses,  some  casual  and  brief,  some  long  and 
scarcely  understood  at  the  time  ?  It  is  impossible 
to  maintain  the  absolute  historical  accuracy  of  the 
Gospel  historians,  without  also  maintaining  their 
inspiration.^ 

1  Witli  the  Evangelists,  authorship  could  not  have  been  the  pro- 
duct of  experience.     If  not  the  offspring  of  experience,  autliorship 


PRESUMPTIVE   ARGUMENT  FOR   INSPIRATION.     103 

While  not  unduly  pressing  these  presumptive 
arguments,!  it  may  fairly  be  claimed  that  they 
prepare  tlie  way  for  considering  Avithout  prejudice 
the  direct  proofs  of  Inspiration. 

could  not  have  been  the  result  of  education.  If  not  the  effect  of 
education,  authorship  could  not  have  had  its  birth  in  instinct, 
since  instinct  must  emerge  in  the  formulating  intellect  to  become  art. 
And  at  this  point  the  ideal  is  inexplicable,  except  on  the  ground  of 
a  divine  revelation  in  conjunction  with  a  divine  inspiration.  Reve- 
lation applies  to  the  facts  used,  inspiration  to  their  mode  of  using 
them. —  Dr.  A.  A.  Lipscomb's  Studies  in  the  Forty  Days,  p.  80. 

1  It  is  a  ver}'  strange  misapprehension  and  exaggeration  of  the 
amount  of  stress  assigned  to  the  presumptive  arguments,  when 
Coleridge  states  what  he  considers  to  be  the  strength  of  the  argu- 
ments in  behalf  of  Inspiration  with  which  he  had  to  contend,  or 
the  "motives  usually  assigned  for  maintaining  and  enjoining  it. 
Such,  for  instance,  are  the  arguments  drawn  from  the  anticipated 
loss  and  damage  that  would  result  from  its  abandonment  ;  as  that 
it  would  de[)rive  the  Christian  world  of  its  only  infallible  arbiter  in 
questions  of  Faith  and  Duty  ;  suppress  the  only  common  and  in- 
appellable  tribunal  ;  that  the  Bible  is  the  only  religious  bond  of 
union  and  gi'ound  of  unity  among  Protestants,  and  the  like." 
(Confessions  of  an  Inquiring  Spirit,  Letter  IV.)  Whatever  weight 
these  considerations  are  justly  entitled  to,  they  should  have  ;  but 
Mr.  Coleridge  surely  was  unfortunate,  if  he  found  these  to  be  the 
c/(iV/ arguments  which  upholders  of  the  strict  idea  of  Inspiration 
"  usually  assigned  for  maintaining  and  enjoining  it."  They  are 
commonly  stated,  it  is  true,  but  always  in  a  brief  and  preliminary 
way.  The  other  arguments,  hereafter  to  be  presented,  are  the  ones 
usually  and  mainly  relied  on. 


CHAPTER  11. 

WHAT   DIRECT    EVIDENCE  OF    INSPIRATION  IS 
TO   BE  EXPECTED? 

BEFORE  proceeding  to  examine  the  positive 
Proofs  of  Inspiration,  two  preliminary  ques- 
tions demand  investigation,  viz.  :  1.  From  what 
source  can  direct  proofs  come  ?  2.  In  ivhat  form 
may  they  be  expected  ? 

I.  From  what  source  can  Direct  Proofs  of  In- 
spiration come  ?  We  answer :  Only  from  the  Bible 
itself. 

By  most  writers  on  the  subject  this  would  be  at 
once  admitted  as  correct ;  and  this  is  involved  in 
the  very  attempt  we  are  making  to  ascertain  "  the 
Bible  doctrine  "  of  Inspiration.  By  others,  how- 
ever, we  are  met  at  the  very  threshold  with  an 
objection  that  is  not  without  plausibility,  yet  when 
attentively  examined  is  entirely  destitute  of  validit}'. 
They  challenge  the  admissibility  of  the  witness,  the 
only  direct  witness  that  we  endeavor  to  present,  or 
that  can  be  presented.  They  absolutely  rule  him 
out  of  court.  This  is  bringing  the  Bible,  they  say, 
to  prove  the  Bible,  assuming  Inspiration  to  prove 
Inspiration,  and  tliereforc  reasoning  in  a  circle. 


WHAT  DIRECT  EVIDENCE  EXPECTED.   105 

Not  so.  We  only  assert,  in  the  first  instance, 
and  that  not  without  evidence,  the  truthfulness  of 
the  Bible,  not  its  inspiration  ;  and  thence  we  infer 
that  its  statements  about  itself,  as  well  as  in  regard 
to  other  things,  are  to  be  believed. 

1.  We  proceed  upon  data  that  are  admitted. 
The  veracity  of  the  historical  record  in  the  Scrip- 
tures, the  honesty  of  the  writers,  the  reality  of 
their  divine  mission,  are  in  general  admitted  by  our 
opponents  ;  for  we  are  discussing  with  Christians, 
not  with  infidels.  Accordingly,  we  are  fairly  en- 
titled to  argue  on  these  data.  If  we  commenced  at 
the  other  end,  and  assumed  Inspiration  to  prove 
Credibility,  we  should  be  guilty  of  the  fallacy 
alleged. 

But,  aside  from  admissions  of  many  of  our  oppo- 
nents, it  is  evident  that  this  testimony  of  the  Bible 
as  to  itself  is  legitimate  ;  for 

2.  We  are  shut  up  by  the  nature  of  the  case  to 
such  evidence.  If  there  was  such  a  fact  as  Inspira- 
tion at  all,  there  could  be  only  two  personal  wit- 
nesses to  it,  —  the  prophet  himself  and  God.  Wlien 
the  Almighty  commissioned  him  to  speak  His  words, 
there  were,  in  that  solitary  and  awful  presence-cham- 
ber of  Deity,  none  with  the  prophet.  No  testimony 
on  earth  except  his  own,  could  avail  to  prove  what 
was  done.  It  is  the  kind  of  proof  pertinent  to 
the  fact,  the  only  kind  primarily  legitimate,  and 
accessible. 

3.  The  testimony  of  God  is  added.     We  begin, 


lOG  BIBLE   DOCTRINE   OF  INSPIRATION. 

in  the  order  of  tlie  argument,  witli  the  testimony 
of  the  man ;  but  we  find  next  the  witness  of  God, — 
and  this  completes  the  possible  personal  evidence 
in  the  case.  (Compare  Hebrews  ii.  4,  "  God  uniting 
ivith  them  in  bearing  testimony.")  Standing  on  the 
common  ground  occupied  by  both  parties  in  this 
portion  of  the  discussion,  —  that  there  has  been  a 
real  revelation  made  to  these  writers,  and  tliat  this 
is  contained  in  the  Bible,  —  the  assertions  of  inspi- 
ration made  by  the  writers  as  to  themselves  or  their 
associates,  become  authenticated  as  a  fact  made 
known  by  God,  and  must  be  accepted  as  forming 
part  of  the  Revelation  he  has  given.  Their  re- 
peated and  distinct  statements,  thus  authenticated, 
cannot  be  set  aside  as  unintentional  and  unavoid- 
able error,  as  part  of  the  "  frame-work,"  unim- 
portant to  the  substance  of  their  message.  It  is 
fundamental  to  their  message  that  they  claim  to  he 
messengers.  And  this  claim  God  himself  confirms 
in  manifold  ways. 

4.  To  this  argument  is  added,  in  some  cases,  the 
peculiar  seal  of  miracles,  which  is  again  the  testi- 
mony of  God  in  another  form.  (Mark  xvi.  20  ; 
Hebrews  ii.  4.) 

And  this  applies  not  only  to  those  who  person- 
ally wrought  miraculous  signs  attesting  their  words, 
but  to  the  others  also.  Even  those  who  wrought 
no  miracle  "  formed  part  and  parcel  of  a  miraculous 
system,  which  cast  its  halo  of  light'  and  evidence 
around  the  revelation  of  which  their  writintrs  were 


WHAT   DIRECT   EVIDENCE   EXPECTED.         107 

constituents."  (Bannerman,  281.)  John  the  Bap- 
tist performed  no  miracle,  but  his  teacliings  were 
amply  attested  as  divine  by  prophecy  going  before, 
and  the  seal  of  the  Lord  Jesus  following  after.  So 
Luke  did  no  miracle,  so  far  as  we  know ;  but  his 
writings  seem  to  have  been  accepted  by  apostolic 
men  as  of  equal  authority  with  their  own,  before 
the  age  of  miracles  ceased. 

5.  To  this  must  be  added  that  one  inspired 
writer  testifies  to  another.  Thus  we  have,  in  still 
another  form,  the  witness  of  God,  who  bestowed 
the  gift  upon  one,  when  He  confirms  and  recognizes 
it  through  the  lips  of  another.  Accordingly,  the 
manifold  allusions  and  references  of  one  part  of 
Scripture  to  another  present  the  testimony  of  God 
in  many  forms  and  through  manifold  channels. 

Thus,  "  across  long  intervals  of  time,  with  many 
generations  lying  between,  with  no  personal  knowl- 
edge of  the  authors  or  their  qualifications,  with  no 
source  of  information  except  that  which  is  unseen 
and  from  above,  one  Scripture  author  may  witness 
to  otliers,  and  claim  to  be  believed,  because  speak- 
ing by  instructions  from  God.  It  is  thus  that  a  man 
living  in  apostolic  times,  if  himself  endowed  with 
revelation  from  heaven,  may  be  a  competent  wit- 
ness to  the  inspiration  of  records  contemporaneous 
with  the  judges  or  the  monarchs  of  the  Hebrew 
people."  (Bannerman,  281.)  So  the  New  Testa- 
ment generally  is  an  effective  witness  to  the  in- 
spiration of  tlic  Old. 


108  BIBLE  DOCTRINE   OF  INSPIRATION. 

G.  This  method  of  argument  is  only  an  example 
of  what  is  both  common  and  legitimate  as  to  other 
subjects  ;  that  is,  to  build  up  an  argument  by  suc- 
cessive steps,  to  advance  from  a  lower  point  ad- 
mitted or  proved  to  the  higher  points  really  involved 
in  it,  or  deducible  from  it. 

The  successive  steps  here  may  be  stated  as 
follows :  — 

a.  The  historical  verity  of  the  Gospel  facts  in 
general. 

h.  The  elevated  moral  character  of  the  writers. 

c.  Their  freedom  from  motive  to  deceive. 

d.  The  impossibility,  under  the  circumstances, 
of  their  being  deceived. 

e.  The  actuality  of  the  miracles,  or  supernatural 
signs. 

/.  The  reality  of  the  Revelation,  as  a  whole,  that 
had  been  so  authenticated. 

g.  The  veracity  of  the  statements  of  the  book 
about  Scripture  in  general,  and  about  special  parts 
of  it  in  particular. 

The  argument,  then,  it  will  be  seen,  is  really 
cumulative  and  progressive.  It  is  not  like  a  chaiu, 
where  the  whole  depends  on  each  separate  link, 
and  consequently  the  whole  is  no  stronger  than  the 
weakest  link.  But  each  point  proven  adds  support 
to  all  the  rest. 

7.  But  if  the  objection  to  using  the  assertions 
of  the  Bible  as  to  its  own  inspiration  be  thus  evi- 
dently groundless,  it  is  equally  clear  that  no  fair 


WHAT   DIRECT  EVIDENCE   EXPECTED.       109 

objection  can  be  made  to  our  drawing  arguments 
from  i\\Q.  ijhenomena  of  the  Scriptures  to  show  their 
origin  and  nature.  Tliis  is  the  method  employed 
in  all  physical  science,  to  argue  from  the  facts 
back  to  the  influences  or  circumstances  under 
which  they  were  produced.  Design  is  seen  in  the 
works  of  Nature ;  tlie  divinity  of  the  Author  of 
Nature  is  fairly  proved  by  these  works.  And  so 
the  divine  authorship  of  the  Scriptures  may  be  seen 
in  its  characteristics.  Thus  while  the  Bible,  as  a 
whole,  testifies  of  Christ,  Christ  testifies  to  the 
Bible.  The  Apostles  testify  of  Jesus,  and  Jesus 
authorizes  and  commissions  the  Apostles.  The 
Church,  as  a  historically  established  institution, 
holds  forth  the  Bible  as  the  Word  of  truth,  and  the 
Word  attests  the  divine  lineage  of  the  Church  of 
the  Lord  Jesus.  And,  added  to  all  this  mutual 
and  interacting  strength  of  testimony,  we  have  the 
phenomena  of  Scripture  and  of  early  church  life 
confirming  each  other,  and  both  indicating  with  the 
utmost  clearness,  like  the  shining  sun  and  the  fertile 
earth,  that  the  hand  that  made  them  is  divine. 

II.  Another  preliminary  question  relates  to  the 
form  in  which  this  evidence  of  the  Bible  concern- 
ing its  own  inspiration  is  given. 

a.  The  testimony  is,  sometimes,  explicit.  We 
shall  see  some  quotations  of  this  kind. 

h.  It  is  more  generally  presented  by  being  im- 
plied and  assumed  all  along  in  what  the  Scripture 


110  BIBLE   DOCTEINE   OF  INSPIRATION. 

says ;  in  the  tone  of  authority  it  nses,  in  the  con- 
scious dignity  with  which  it  represents  the  destinies 
of  men  for  time  and  for  eternity  as  dependent  on 
its  acceptance  or  rejection. 

c.  The  testimony  is  also  found  in  the  phenomena 
apparent  on  the  very  face  of  the  Scriptures  ;  and 
accordingly  the  true  doctrine  of  inspiration  is  to 
be  gathered  by  legitimate  induction  from  these,  as 
well  as  from  express  assertions. 

This  is  the  only  truly  scientific,  as  well  as  the 
Scriptural, method  of  arriving  at  the  genuine  doctrine 
of  inspiration.  All  the  evidence  should  be  admit- 
ted, all  the  classes  of  phenomena  should  be  exam- 
ined. "We  must  not  only  use  the  inductive  method, 
but  must  use  it  legitimately,  thoroughly,  candidly. 
Professor  Ladd  has  spoken  on  this  sul)ject  with 
great  clearness  and  force.  Yet,  as  he  justly  says, 
"  certain  postulates  must  underlie  this,  as  well  as 
every  other  induction.  And  w^hether  the  induction 
be  genuine  and  successful,  or  not,  will  largely  depend 
upon  the  character  and  use  of  these  postulates."  ^ 
(Doctrine  of  Sacred  Scripture,  Vol.  I.  p.  17.) 

1  The  postulates  subsequently  stated  by  Professor  Ladd  are 
three  :  "  1.  the  self-revelation  of  God  in  redemption,  involving  the 
l)0ssibility  and  the  actuality  of  miracles,  and  of  inspiration  as  proph- 
ecy,—  the  subjective  miracle;  2.  the  infallible  authority  of  Jesus 
Christ  upon  matters  included  in  the  doctrine  of  salvation,  .  .  .  not 
iiecessarily  including  in  itself  the  claim  to  infallibility  on  tlie  part 
of  Christ  with  respect  to  merely  critical  and  historical  matters  ; 
3.  the  reality  of  those  truths  which  underlie  the  persistent  and  uni- 
versal thoughts  and  feelings  of  the  Chiistian  consciousness."  (p.  21.) 
To  the  second  of  these,  as  unduly  limited,  and  to  the  third,  as 
vague  and  capable  of  the  most  varied  interpretation  and  application, 


WHAT   DIRECT   EVIDENCE   EXPECTED.        Ill 

The  Bible  makes  on  its  own  behalf  high  and 
peculiar  claims.  This  is  obvious  to  even  a  cursory 
reader.  But  the  strength  of  the  argument  is  not 
in  the  fact  that  the  assertion  of  an  origin  above 

we  should  have  to  object  decidedly.  For  us  the  authority  of  Jesus 
Christ  is  primal  and  final,  wherever  a  sure  w-ord  of  His  can  be 
found.  We  see  no  reason  for  excepting  "critical  and  historical 
matters,"  nor  any  practicable  method  of  determining  how  far  the 
range  of  such  an  exception  is  to  extend.  It  is  scarcely  satisfactoiy 
to  be  assured  that  Jesus  Christ  spoke  the  truth,  excejit  on  "  critical 
and  historical  matters,"  even  if  accompanied  by  the  assurance  that 
these  "rarely  appear  to  have  entered  the  horizon  of  his  teaching." 
How  much  is  criticism  ?  how  much  is  history  ?  Are  all  matters  of 
fact,  all  questions  of  interpretation,  to  be  included  in  this  range  of 
topics  on  which  what  He,  said  is  not,  to  he  relied  on  ? 

And  as  to  "Christian  consciousness,"  it  is  too  liable  to  speak 
with  the  voice  of  its  interpreter,  whoever  he  may  be,  just  as  all 
Swedenborg's  alleged  interlocutors  in  the  spiritual  world  Siccdcn- 
borgianize. 

It  seems  to  us  that  the  learned  author  has  himself  been  unduly 
subject  to  the  influence  of  this  last  "postulate."  The  keynote  to 
his  whole  treatise  is  a  sentence  near  its  commencement,  which 
affirms  that  "any  dogma  as  to  its  (the  Bible's)  origin  and  nature 
must  be  content  to  take  simply  the  place  which  fitly  belongs  to  it 
as  assigned  by  the  Christian  consciousness,  developing  under  the 
guidance  of  the  Spirit  who  gave  the  Bible  to  tlie  Church."  (Doctrine 
of  Sacred  Srri])t>(rc,  Vol.  I.  p.  5.  Compare  also  p.  18.)  Never- 
theless, he  frankly  admits  that  it  is  "imjjerative  that  we  should 
acknowledge  the  falsity  of  many  opinions  held  by  the  learned,  and  by 
the  entire  community  of  believers,  during  all  the  past  history  of  the 
Church."  He  adds  appropriately,  that,  "  although  some  paits  of 
this  inquiry  can  scarcely  be  put  into  scientific  form,  yet  they  are  not 
for  this  reason  devoid  of  real  and  great  yalue.  The  heart  of  the 
Church  and  of  the  race  may  be  heard  to  beat,  and  its  warm  life 
recognized  as  present,  where  no  exact  anatomical  description  can 
be   given."      (p.  20.) 

Piofessor  Ladd  says  many  things  grandly  and  truly,  but  it  ap- 
pears to  us  that  he  often  takes  away  with  one  hand  what  he  has 
given  with  the  other.     He  announces  an  important  doctrine  or  fact 


112  BIBLE   DOCTRINE   OF   INSPIRATION. 

man  is  made  so  expressly  or  repeatedly.  If  not 
directly  claimed  at  all,  it  would  be  naturally  sug- 
gested and  fairly  inferred. 

The  student  of  the  Bible  feels  himself  lifted  into 

but  then  follows  with  so  many  exceptions  and  limitations,  and  bal- 
ances so  nicely  between  truth  and  error,  as  scarcely  to  leave  room 
for  distinct  or  cordial  conviction. 

Christ's  authority  is  indeed  recognized  by  him  as  primal  and 
absolute  ;  but  he  assures  us  that  Christ's  "attitude  is  manifestly 
uncritical."  Jesus  "  believed  the  Old  Testament  to  contain  certain 
important  divinely  revealed  truths"  ;  but  "does  not  commit  his 
opinion  to  its  entire  historical  accuracy."  His  "reserve"  as  to 
debated  questions  "cannot  be  held  to  be  wholly  due  to  ignorance." 
If  Jesus  alludes  to  the  history  of  Jonah  or  of  the  flood,  this,  we  are 
told,  cannot  be  "pleaded  in  favor  of  the  historical  accuracy"  of 
these  accounts,  because  he  did  not  design  to  authenticate  them. 
Doubtless  his  specific  design  in  the  allusion  may  have  been  to  illus- 
trate his  teaching,  rather  than  to  authenticate  those  facts, —  which 
indeed  was  unnecessary,  as  none  of  his  hearers  doubted  them.  But 
does  not  the  allusion  unmistakably  recognize  them  as  feats  ? 

Again  we  are  told,  "  Jesus  may  speak  as  though  he  held  a  certain 
opinion  upon  a  critical  question  of  the  Old  Testament,  and  yet  the 
inference  may  be  by  no  means  valid  that  he  really  held  this  opinion." 
Tlie  Bible,  as  a  whole,  is  unquestionably  divine  ;  but  it  is  "not  in- 
fallible" in  "historical  views  and  statements,"  in  its  "  narrative  of 
miracles,"  or  even  of  the  "life  and  resurrection  of  Christ."  Nor 
can  we  affirm  that  "  the  logic  of  its  argumentative  passages  is 
irreproachalile,  and  its  interpretation  of  its  own  earlier  passages 
always  defensible"  ;  nor  "that  the  Scripture  is  free  from  even  im- 
moral feeling  impressed  upon  it  by  the  human  character  of  its 
origin."  "  Even  in  the  New  Testament  we  cannot  deny  that  there 
exist  mistaken  impressions  in  matters  of  ethical  and  religious 
kind."  But  when  the  Bible  has  been  "  sifted  by  critical  and  his- 
torical research,"  and  tested  and  approbated  by  the  "Christian  con- 
sciousness," it  is  alleged  that  it  is  the  great  source  of  information 
as  to  the  person  and  work  of  Christ. 

To  us  it  seems  as  if,  in  all  this,  there  is  a  great  mingling  of  the 
miry  clay  of  conjecture  and  error  with  the  iron  of  the  mighty  truths 
which  Dr.  Ladd  elsewhere  vigorously  states  and  advocates. 


WHAT  DIRECT   EVIDENCE   EXPECTED.        113 

a  region  higher  than  the  boundaries  of  human  ex- 
ploration. It  handles  the  loftiest  themes  with  a 
quiet  simplicity,  a  regal  familiarity  which  betrays 
no  consciousness  of  intruding  into  forbidden  mys- 
teries. The  assertion  of  superiority  over  man  is 
not  made  in  any  offensive  or  supercilious  way,  but 
even  as  Jesus  himself,  who  was  the  pattern  of 
meekness,  yet  spake  as  never  man  spake,  with  au- 
thority and  not  as  the  Scribes. 

The  Bible  docs  not  seem  anxious  about  its  own 
recognition.  The  divine  manifestation  in  it  is 
much  as  we  find  it  in  creation  and  providence.  No 
voice  proclaims  Him,  no  letters  of  living  sunbeam  on 
the  radiant  sky,  no  iron  pen  engraving  God's  glory 
in  granite  rock.  But  every  harmony  of  nature  is 
vocal  with  his  praise,  every  mute  and  motionless 
rock  inscribed  all  over  with  the  characters  which, 
if  riglitly  read,  reveal  the  wonders  of  his  power. 

The  evidences  and  assertions  of  its  own  inspira- 
tion in  the  Bible  are  usually,  then,  as  they  might 
be  expected  to  be,  not  dogmatic  formulas,  not  anx- 
ious self-indications,  but  incidental  and  simple. 
Such,  in  fact,  is  the  general  method  of  doctrinal 
teaching  in  Scripture  on  all  subjects.^ 

1  Tliis  peculiarity  of  method  is  very  properly  recognized  hj  Pro- 
fessor Ladd  :  "There  is  a  marked  correspondence  between  Jesus's 
method  of  teaching  and  the  divine  method  of  instruction  and  dis- 
ci[)line  in  nature  and  providence.  We  discover  less  effort  to  force 
the  truth  upon  men  than  to  stir  their  inquiry  ;  little  care  to  guard 
the  careless  against  misapjirehHusion,  much  care  to  rouse  them  to 
a  true  apprehension.  His  teaching  is  not  a  co])y-lesson,  but  a  spur 
to  industry." —  Doctrine  of  Sacred  Scripture,  Vol.  I.  p.  31. 


CHAPTER   III. 

DIRECT  PROOFS   OF  INSPIRATION. 

I.     The  General  Manner  of  Quoting  Scripture  in 
Scripture. 

THIS  embraces  especially  the  quotations  and 
allusions  to  the  Old  Testament  in  the  New, 
and  thus  gives,  in  a  general  way,  the  testimony  of 
our  Lord  and  of  the  Apostles.  To  bring  it  out  in 
full  would  require  us  to  go  over  the  passages  in 
detail.  A  fair  sample  of  the  evidence  could  be  had 
by  taking  the  allusions  to  the  Old  Testament  in 
Matthew  and  Hebrews,  selecting  one  Gospel  and 
one  Epistle  for  comparison.^  But  even  this  we 
cannot  now  exhibit  at  length.  We  can  only  pre- 
sent a  summary. 

A.  As  TO  THE  Old  Testament. 

When  Christ  came,  there  was  a  body  of  writings 
in  the  hands  of  the  Jews,  the  object  of  their  pe- 
culiar reverence  and  attention.  It  was  recognized 
not  merely  as  embodying  the  poetry  of  their  an- 

1  Compare  Bannerman,  311-351;  also  excellent  articles  by  Dr. 
H.  Osgood  on  "The  Old  Testament  according  to  the  Testimony  of 
Jesus  and  the  Apostles,"  and  in  Baptist  Quarterly,  1883,  p.  88  f. ; 
also  Dr.  F.  Gardiner  in  Sunday  School  Times,  May  2Q,  1886. 


DIRECT  PROOFS  OF  INSPIRATION.  115 

tiquity,  the  history  of  their  forefathers,  the  laws  of 
their  nation,  but  above  all  as  the  word  of  God,  not 
only  their  God,  but  the  God  of  all  the  earth,  the 
one  only  living  and  true  God. 

Other  ancient  writings  they  had,  such  as  what 
we  call  the  Apocrypha,  recognized  by  them  all  as 
purely  human,  yet  respected  and  cherished ;  but 
these  sacred  books  which  make  up  our  Old  Tes- 
tament, though  unmistakably  human,  they  regarded 
as  also  indisputably  divine,  and  in  the  strict  sense 
inspired. 

This  universal  belief  of  the  Jewish  people  in 
these  writings  could  not  be  overlooked  by  one  who 
came,  like  our  Saviour,  as  a  teacher,  and  the  Great 
Teacher,  sent  from  God.  It  was  necessary  for 
him  either  to  contradict  that  belief,  if  not  true,  or 
to  sanction  it,  if  true.  Upon  such  a  question  he 
could  not  be  neutral.  The  Gospel,  the  final  em- 
bodiment of  divine  truth,  to  be  presented  to  the 
world  by  Jesus,  the  only  begotten  Son  of  God  him- 
self, could  not  be  planted  in  the  midst  of  unrebuked 
error ;  least  of  all  could  it  be  built  upon  error  as 
its  basis.  And  that  the  New  Testament  Gospel  is 
built  upon  the  Old,  and  assumes  it  throughout  as 
its  basis,  its  forerunner,  its  original  and  foundation, 
is  unquestioned  and  unquestionable. 

It  is  a  significant  and  most  important  fact, 
therefore,  that  there  is  not  only  no  hint  anywhere 
dropped,  either  by  our  Lord  or  by  his  authorized 
Apostles,  that  the  people  have  overestimated  the 


116  BIBLE  DOCTRINE  OF  INSPIRATION. 

authority  of  the  Scriptures  of  the  Old  Testament 
which  they  had ;  but  there  is  constantly  an  appeal 
to  them  as  an  infallible  standard  in  all  religious 
matters.  The  Great  Teacher,  the  personal  Son  of 
God,  newly  come  from  the  throne  of  his  glory, 
might  have  at  once  set  aside  all  previous  revela- 
tions, and  cast  them  into  the  shades  of  insignifi- 
cance and  neglect  by  his  brighter  communications ; 
he  might,  if  he  chose,  have  supplanted,  abrogated, 
consigned  them  to  forgetfulness.  This  is  precisely 
what  he  did  not  do.^ 

Not  only  are  his  discourses  significantly  full  of 
"  echoes  from  the  Old  Testament "  ;  not  only  does 
he  show  a  constant  and  affectionate  familiarity 
with  its  phraseology  well  worthy  of  our  imitation  ; 
not  only  does  he  adopt  its  language  in  prayer,  com- 
fort himself  thereby  in  his  deep  sorrows,  and  for- 
tify his  human  nature  by  it  against  the  assaults  of 
the  Tempter ;  not  only  does  he  argue  from  its 
minute  expressions,  and  expound  its  prophecies  as 
having  wider  applications  than  the  human  authors 
could  have  had  in  mind,  thereby  referring  them 
necessarily  to  a  Higher  Author,  who  gave  them 
this  typical  intent ;  — but  he  takes  pains  expressly 

1  Our  Lord's  appeal  to  the  Old  Testament  is  to  be  considered  in 
view  of  these  two  facts  :  (1)  He  recognizes  in  his  teaching  no  hu- 
man authority,  and  (2)  He  does  recognize  absolutely  the  authority 
of  his  Heavenly  Father.  Whatever  recognition,  then,  he  gives  to 
the  authority  of  the  Old  Testament,  can  only  be  on  the  ground  of  its 
having  proceeded  from  his  Father.  Compare  Matthew  vii.  28,  29  ; 
John  viii.  28.  —  Dr.  F.  Gakdiner. 


DIRECT  PROOFS   OF  INSPIRATION.  117 

to  encourage  liis  disciples  to  study  and  reverence 
the  ancient  Scriptures  as  the  Word  of  God. 

"  Search  the  Scriptures,"  he  said  ;  or,  if  the  verb 
be  regarded  not  as  Imperative,  but  Indicative,  which 
we  prefer,  the  argument  is  not  at  all  weakened. 
He  is  then  commending,  instead  of  commanding, 
their  search.  "  Ye  search  the  Scriptures,  because 
ye  think  that  in  them  ye  have  eternal  life  ;  and 
these  are  they  which  testify  of  me."  (John  v.  39.) 
You  sent  to  John  (v.  33)  ;  you  saw  the  miracles, 
by  which  the  Father  testified  (v.  36)  ;  you  search 
the  Scriptures  (v.  39)  ;  you  set  your  hope  upon 
Moses  (v.  45).  But  though  all  these  testify  of  me, 
are  full  of  me,  you  will  not  believe.  It  is  right 
for  you  to  listen  to  these  witnesses,  to  interrogate 
them  closely,  to  search  them  fully,  for  they  are  the 
real  methods  in  which  God  has  spoken.  It  is  your 
sin  and  sliame  that,  recognizing  them  and  claiming 
to  heed  them,  you  have  not  recognized  me  by 
means  of  them.^ 

The  fundamental  passage,  however,  in  which  our 
Lord  expressly  sets  forth  his  relation  to  the  law 
and  the  prophets  of  the  Old  Covenant,  is  in  the 
Sermon  on  the  Mount ;  and  this  is  confirmed  by  the 

^  It  is  suggested  by  Dr.  Ladd,  in  connection  with  this  passage, 
that  the  Saviour  accuses  the  Jews  "  of  folly  and  sin  in  idolizing  the 
written  Word,  while  neglecting  its  ideal  contents  of  truth."  (I.  51.) 
But  does  he  ?  He  commends  their  search  of  the  Scriptures,  blames 
their  blindness  to  the  truth  so  plainly  contained  in  it,  and  censures 
their  unauthorized  additions  to  it  by  tradition  ;  but  says  not  a 
word  about  idolizing  the  written  Word. 


118  BIBLE  DOCTRINE  OF  INSPIRATION. 

parallel  expressions  which  he  subsequently  employs, 
in  reference  to  particular  precepts. 

In  Matthew  v.  17,  18,  Jesus  says :  "  Think  not 
that  I  came  to  destroy  (unloose,  abrogate)  the  law 
or  the  prophets  ;  I  came  not  to  destroy,  but  to  fulfil 
(complete).  For  verily  I  say  unto  you,  Till  heaven 
and  earth  pass  away,  one  jot  or  one  tittle  shall  in 
no  wise  pass  away  from  the  law,  till  all  things  be 
accomplished." 

"  The  law  and  the  prophets  "  must  evidently  be 
regarded,  as  is  generally  agreed,  to  be  a  summary 
for  the  entire  Old  Testament  revelation.  He  will 
not  abrogate,  he  will  comi)lete  them.  "  To  use  a 
figure  of  speech  as  old  as  Theophylact,  Christ  does 
not  intend  to  rub  out  and  destroy  the  sketch  in 
shadow-lines  before  him,  but  with  true  and  ideal 
art  will  fill  it  in  to  the  completion  of  the  picture." 
(Ladd,  I.  36.)  "  The  jot  and  the  tittle  are,"  as 
Professor  Ladd  further  and  well  says,  "  an  insep- 
arable part  of  an  indelible  page." 

Two  things  are  here  distinctly  affirmed,  —  the 
perpetual  obligation  of  the  Old  Testament,  and  its 
imperfection,  —  so  that  it  needs  completion.  Dr. 
Ladd  finds,  in  this  primary  teaching  of  Christ,  a 
distinction  "  between  absolute  contents  of  truth 
and  imperfect  form,  relative  to  the  pedagogic  pur- 
poses of  these  contents  ";  and  the  truth,  he  thinks, 
came  from  God,  while  the  form  is  human,  fallible, 
transitory.  To  us  it  seems  that  our  Lord  makes 
no  such  distinction  ;   that  both  the  contents  and 


DIRECT  PROOFS  OF  INSPIRATION.  119 

the  form  are  of  divine  ordination ;  that  the  imper- 
fect is  not  necessarily  erroneous,  the  transitory  not 
false,  nor  even  fallible  ;  that  all  was  true  and  divine 
so  far  as  it  went ;  and  for  the  time  for  which  it 
was  given,  it  was  the  best  and  most  appropriate. 
But  the  time  had  come  for  additions  to  be  made, 
for  germs  to  be  developed,  for  partial  truths  to  be 
completed,  for  the  outlines  to  be  filled  in,  so  as  to 
give  the  more  distinct  picture.  All  this  might  be, 
without  erasing  a  single  line,  or  charging  on  it  a 
single  error. 

That  this  is  the  correct  interpretation  of  this 
important  and  confessedly  fundamental  passage,  is 
obvious,  not  only  from  considering  its  exact  ex- 
pressions, but  from  the  instances  of  modification  of 
the  law,  which  our  Lord  goes^  on  to  make.  None  of 
them  are  contrary  to  it :  all  go  fiirtlier  in  the  same 
direction.  The  first  two,  for  instance,  as  to  killing 
and  adultery,  are  extensions  of  the  Decalogue  pre- 
cept from  the  outward  act  to  the  inward  disposition 
which  would  prompt  it.  The  next,  as  to  divorce 
(a  subject  treated  afterwards  more  fully,  Matthew 
xix.  3-9),  shows  that  the  original  divine  law  was 
monogamy,  and  that  the  ease  of  divorce  was  a  tem- 
porary concession  made  under  the  Mosaic  law  to 
"  the  hardness  of  men's  hearts."  But  surely  it  will 
not  be  alleged  that  in  this  Moses  contradicted  the 
divine  will,  and  acted  without  sanction  from  the 
Almighty.  The  concession  for  the  time  was  as 
truly  authorized  by  God  as  tlie  original  law,  and  as 


120  BIBLE   DOCTRINE   OF  INSPIRATION. 

its  subsequent  restoration.  The  one  saying  which 
Jesus  condemns  is  "  hate  thine  enemy  ";  and  that 
is  not  in  the  laiv,  but  was  one  of  their  traditional 
additions. 

It  may  be  added,  that  in  general  the  very  idea  of 
a  progressive,  advancing  revelation  implies  a  rela- 
tive imperfection  in  the  earlier  parts,  and  that  this 
imperfection  of  incompleteness  is  perfectly  consist- 
ent with  truth,  and  with  the  divine  origin  of  both 
earlier  and  later.  If  otherwise,  all  progress  in 
divine  revelation,  which  our  opponents  perceive 
and  affirm  as  distinctly  as  we,  must  be  denied. 

Our  Lord  modifies  the  law.  Yes !  There  are 
progress  and  improvement  from  the  Old  Testa- 
ment to  the  New.  Yes !  And  there  are  also  in 
the  Old  Testament  itself.  Equally  also  in  the  New 
Testament.  Even  further,  can  they  not  be  discov- 
ered in  the  personal  teachings  of  our  Lord  Jesus 
himself?  There  is  obvious,  deliberate,  and  inten- 
tional advance  in  his  preaching,  from  that  first 
simple  proclamation,  which  merely  repeated  the 
warning  and  the  announcement  of  the  forerunner, 
"  Repent,  for  the  kingdom  of  heaven  is  at  hand," 
to  the  matured  and  deep  instructions  of  the  night 
of  his  betrayal.  And  even  those  were  incomplete, 
leaving  "  many  things  "  still  reserved  for  the  fur- 
ther opportunity  of  the  forty  days,  and  still  others 
for  the  communication  of  the  promised  Spirit. 
Imperfect  ?   partial  ?     Yes,  but  not  erroneous  ! 

In   the   similar  expressions  found   in   Matthew 


DIRECT  PROOFS   OF  INSPIRATION.  121 

xi.  13,  and  Luke  xvi.  16,  17,  onr  Saviour  reiterates 
the  same  teaching.  Until  John,  the  law  and  the 
prophets  had  remained  the  one  grand  source  of 
divinely  authorized  information  ;  now,  they  are  to 
be,  not  superseded,  condemned  to  failure,  but  re- 
tained and  completed.  *Not  an  item  is  to  be  lost, 
not  a  jot,  not  a  tittle. 

Again,  our  Lord  gives  a  very  striking  witness  to 
the  sufficiency  of  the  Old  Testament  in  the  parable 
of  the  Rich  Man  and  Lazarus.  Even  the  resurrec- 
tion of  one  from  the  dead  would  not  convince  a 
man  who  refuses  credence  to  Moses  and  the  proph- 
ets (Luke  xvi.  29-31),  because  the  attitude  of  heart 
which  leads  to  the  rejection  of  the  former  appeal 
will  not  be  changed  by  even  the  embodiment  of  the 
truth  in  the  resurrection  of  the  Messiah. 

There  is,  however,  another  sense  in  which  Jesus 
fulfilled  the  law  and  the  prophets.  "We  do  not  al- 
lude to  the  fact  that  he  obeyed  the  precepts  with  a 
moral  purity  and  exactness  never  before  found  in 
man.  Though  this  w^as  true,  it  does  not  seem  to 
be  the  truth  suggested  in  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount. 
But  Jesus  completed  the  law  and  the  prophets,  not 
only  by  enlarging,  elevating,  and  developing  the 
true  meaning  really  embodied  in  them,  but  also 
by  being  that  to  which  they  pointed,  by  filling  in 
person  the  description  they  had  given  in  word  and 
type. 

Age  after  age,  under  divine  direction,  a  picture 
had  been  growing.     The  eyes  of  our  first  parents, 


122  BIBLE   DOCTKIXE   OF  INSPIRATION. 

dim  with  tears  as  tlicy  left  the  howers  of  Paradise, 
had  caught  and  cherished  tlie  faint  outline  of  a 
future  deliverer.  One  stroke  after  another  had 
been  added  to  the  canvas  as  successive  generations 
passed  by.  Painter  after  painter  had  taken  the 
brush —  ohliteratinij  nothing^  but  adding  here  a  tint 
and  there  a  shade  —  and  then  died.  But  the  pic- 
ture lives  and  grows,  century  after  century,  through 
the  long  series  of  revelations  ;  with  a  marvellous 
variety,  for  scores  of  hands  combine  to  form  it ; 
with  a  yet  more  marvellous  unity,  for  One  controls 
them  all. 

And  now  the  picture  is  finished,  but  there  is  not 
on  earth  one  whom  it  resembles ;  there  is  as  yet 
none  even  that  conijjrehends  it.  It  is  folded  away 
for  four  hundred  years. 

Then,  when  the  fulness  of  time  is  come,  strange 
attention  is  concentrated  on  this  ancient  canvas ; 
the  picture  is  unrolled,  and  searched  anew  by 
eager,  devout,  thoughtful  eyes ;  and  lo,  beside  it 
there  stands  one  whom  the  Forerunner  recognizes. 
"See!  This  is  God's  Lamb,  who  takes  away  the 
world's  sin."  There  is  the  old  picture !  Here  is 
the  present  reality  !  All  that  the  law  and  the 
prophets  promised.  He  was ! 

Thus  the  person  and  life  of  Jesus  the  Messiah, 
as  well  as  his  words  and  teachings,  are  seen  to  rest 
upon  the  Old  Testament  Scriptures  ;  to  confirm 
and  verify  them  in  the  very  fact  of  appealing  to 
them  for  testimony. 


DIRECT  PROOFS  OF  INSPIRATION.  123 

It  is  alleged,  however,  that  our  Saviour,  while 
rccoguizing  the  law  and  the  prophets,  contradicted 
them  in  sundry  particulars.  Let  us  examine  the 
grounds  of  this  assertion. 

In  his  teachings  as  to  the  Sabbath  (Matthew  xii. 
1-8,  Mark  ii.  23-28,  Luke  vi.  1-5)  he  does  set 
himself  above  the  ceremonial  law,  as  a  master,  not 
as  its  servant.  But  even  in  doing  this  he  does  not 
subvert  it  or  set  it  aside.  He  does  not,  as  Dr. 
Ladd  claims,  introduce  and  apply  "  a  new  norm  or 
moral  code  for  the  observance  of  the  moral  and  re- 
ligious truths  contained  in  the  law  "  (I.  43)  ;  he 
simply  gives  an  authoritative  interpretation  of  the 
law.  Tlie  act  of  the  disciples,  which  the  Pharisees 
censured,  in  rubbing  out  the  ears  of  wheat,  because 
it  was  working  on  the  Sabbath,  was  not  a  violation 
of  tlie  Mosaic  law,  though  it  was  in  contravention 
of  the  Rabbinical  traditions.  And  hence  this  can- 
not be  pleaded  as  an  instance  in  which  Jesus  "  must 
allow  to  pass  from  obligation,  as  a  part  of  that  law, 
many  of  its  special  enactments,  observances,  and 
established  points  of  view."  That  the  purely  cere- 
monial, typical,  and  symbolic  features  of  the  Jewish 
ritual  ended  with  Christ,  because  fulfilled  in  Chriat, 
is  agreed.  But  as  to  other  things,  we  maintain, 
the  Saviour  did  not  abolish,  but  rather  interpreted, 
the  law.  So  here  the  true  meaning  of  the  Sabbatic 
law  is  expounded  and  developed,  and,  as  Meyer  says, 
it  is  declared  that  "  doing  well  is  the  moral  norm 
for  the  rest  and  labor  of  the  Sabbath." 


124  BIBLE   DOCTRINE   OF  INSPIRATION. 

In  like  manner  as  to  the  law  of  marriage  and 
divorce  (Matthew  xix.  3-12,  Mark  x.  2-12),  our 
Lord,  it  is  true,  "  places  his  doctrine  above  that  of 
the  schools,  and  also  above  the  provisions  of  the 
Mosaic  law  itself."  But  he  does  so  by  pointing 
out  that  in  that  law  the  original  and  fundamental 
principle  was  not  only  that  one  man  should  be 
joined  to  one  woman,  but  that  they  should  cleave 
together,  forsaking  all  others.  Prior  to  the  giving 
of  the  Mosaic  enactments,  which  were  civil  as  well 
as  moral,  great  laxity  as  to  the  marriage  union 
had  sprung  up  among  the  people.  Introducing  the 
Law  among  such  surroundings,  Moses  did  not  com- 
mand divorce,  as  the  Phai'isees  alleged ;  he  only 
suffered  it,  as  our  Saviour  quietly  corrects  their  ex- 
pression ;  and  he  threw  a  barrier  in  the  way  of  the 
customary  unrestrained  freedom  on  the  subject, 
and  established  a  protection  to  the  weaker  party, 
by  commanding  that,  whenever  there  was  a  send- 
ing away,  there  should  be  a  bill  of  divorcement,  a 
formal,  deliberate,  legal  document.  But  assuredly 
we  are  not  to  charge  this  upon  Moses  as  his  own 
act  without  divine  authority,  and  so  accuse  him  of 
"  a  faultiness  of  moral  judgment."  As  Dr.  Ladd 
himself  says  — "  The  word  used  by  Christ  with 
reference  to  the  act  of  Moses  (suffered),  seems 
rather  to  place  the  human  law-giver  in  some  sort 
at  that  divine  point  of  view  from  which  such  con- 
cessions are  regarded  as  a  necessary  part  of  the 
divine  historic  discipline."     (I.  45.) 


DIRECT  PROOFS  OF  INSPIRATION.  125 

On  the  subject  of  ceremonial  purifications  and 
clean  and  unclean  food,  it  is  urged  that  the  Mosaic 
law  (Matthew  xv.  1-20,  Mark  vii.  1-16)  is  "  at 
the  same  time  contrasted  with  the  tradition  of  the 
elders,  and  also  itself  indirectly  accused  of  being, 
in  respect  to  the  subject  of  tradition,  on  the  same 
unstable  ground "  (Ladd,  I.  46).  The  contrast 
drawn  between  the  law  of  Moses  and  human  tradi- 
tion is  certainly  plain  and  important ;  the  indirect 
accusation  we  fail  to  find  in  anything  said  by  our 
Lord.  He  clearly  affirms  the  divine  origin  of  the 
law,  condemns  their  unauthorized  additions  to  it, 
and  develops  out  of  the  legal  enactments  the  great 
principle  implied  in  them.  Even  as  to  those  cere- 
monial distinctions  between  different  kinds  of  food, 
which  were  to  be  done  away,  they  were  not  in  such 
a  sense  from  Moses  as  to  be  in  contradiction  to 
God's  will.  They  were  from  God,  for  the  time, 
as  truly  as  the  ethical  or  any  other  portions  of 
the  law.  If  our  Lord  revokes  these  distinctions, 
"making  all  meats  clean"  (Mark  vii.  19),  this  is 
not  because  of  their  human  origin,  but  because, 
though  divinely  given,  they  had  served  their  end, 
and  must  pass  away  with  the  dispensation  to  which 
they  belonged,  and  because  he,  as  Lord,  had  and 
claimed  the  right  to  change  even  the  divine  law. 

But  Christ,  we  are  told,  "  seems  to  take  a  hostile 
position  toward  the  ceremonial  law  of  fasting." 
(Matthew  ix.  14-17;  Mark  ii.  18-22;  Luke  v. 
33-39.)     Not   at   all   toward   the   Mosaic   law   of 


126  BIBLE   DOCTRINE   OF  INSPIRATION. 

fasting ;  only  to  that  prescribed  by  tradition  and 
custom.  It  is  well  knoNvn  that  the  Mosaic  law 
commands  only  one  fast  in  the  year,  and  that  with 
a  ceremonial  significance  and  object,  on  the  great 
day  of  Atonement.  The  Saviour  objects  earnestly 
to  the  multiplied  and  merely  formal  observances 
of  this  kind  which  had  been  added  to  the  "  law 
of  Moses." 

It  might  be  shown  abundantly  that  the  Apostles, 
in  like  manner,  only  re-echo  their  Master's  rever- 
ence for  the  ancient  volume  of  Inspiration,  and 
point  the  people  steadfastly  to  it,  in  their  preach- 
ing and  in  their  letters,  as  the  light  to  guide  them 
in  darkness,  as  the  heaven-descended  oracles  to 
lead  them  back  to  God. 

B.   As  TO  THE  New  Testament. 

We  proceed  to  inquire  what  evidence  of  this  gen- 
eral sort  in  quotations  and  allusions  may  be  found 
as  to  the  New  Testament.  From  the  nature  of 
the  case,  much  testimony  cannot  be  expected  in 
one  part  of  the  New  Testament  to  other  parts  of 
it,  as  the  writings  were  so  nearly  contemporary, 
all  within  a  single  generation.  But  it  may  be 
remarked,  — 

1.  That  such  corroborative  testimony  was  scarcely 
needed.  Revelation  without  inspiration  would  have 
impressed  the  Jew  as  an  unheard  of  anomaly,  in 
one  claiming  to  be  a  divine  messenger ;  and  the 
communications  from  on  high  which  were  peculiar 


DIRECT  TROOFS   OF   INSPIRATION.  127 

to  the  New  Dispensation,  being  recognized  as  divine 
on  the  evidence  of  miracles,  did  not  require  the 
confirmation  of  mutual  testimony  to  each  other  by 
the  several  witnesses  for  God,  when  Christ  himself 
had  sent  them  forth,  clothed  with  his  authority,  to 
speak  in  his  name. 

2.  The  reappearance  of  the  prophetic  order  is 
not  only  predicted  by  the  Lord  Jesus,  but  distinctly 
announced  by  Peter  on  the  day  of  Pentecost  as 
having  actually  occurred.  This  is  a  peculiar  and 
marked  feature  of  gospel  times.  For  some  hun- 
dreds of  years,  confessedly,  the  nation  had  been 
without  a  prophet.  They  lamented  over  the  fact, 
were  disheartened  and  mortified  by  the  fact,  but  still 
acknowledged  it  as  a  fact.  And  there  was  scarcely 
anything  more  startling  in  the  incidents  and  an- 
nouncements of  the  day  of  Pentecost  than  the  im- 
pressive and  astounding  assurance  that  the  gift 
of  Prophecy  had  been  revived,  —  which  meant,  as 
we  all  know,  not  the  mere  power  of  foretelling, 
but  specifically  the  power  of  speaking  by  divine 
influence  and  authority. 

That  this  was  an  extraordinary  gift,  differing 
from  the  gracious  blessings  which  all  the  devout 
enjoyed,  needed  no  demonstration  to  them  ;  that  it 
was  temporary,  and  for  special  ends  and  seasons, 
requires  little  proof  to  us.  The  equality  of  the 
Apostles  as  prophets,  in  the  sense  explained,  to 
those  of  the  Old  Dispensation,  was  thoroughly  estab- 
lished, to  the  satisfaction  of  all  Christians  at  least ; 


128  BIBLE    DOCTRINE   OF   INSPIRATION. 

and  this  rendered  unnecessary  the  accumulation  of 
individual  attestations  from  one  of  them  to  the 
other. 

3.  We  may,  however,  profitably  consider,  under 
this  head,  the  way  in  which  the  Apostle  Peter 
refers  to  his  beloved  brotlier  Paul's  writings  as  a 
part  of  the  Scriptures.  (2  Peter  iii.  16.)  This  is 
a  remarkable  allusion.  The  familiar  expression 
everywhere  else  applied  to  the  Old  Testament  writ- 
ings is  here  used  as  to  Paul's  epistles,  "  in  which," 
says  Peter,  "  are  some  things  hard  to  be  under- 
stood, which  the  ignorant  and  unsteadfast  wrest, 
as  they  do  also  the  other  Scriptures,  unto  their 
own  destruction."  It  has  been  suggested  that  this 
phrase,  "  the  other  Scriptures,"  may  include  with 
the  Old  Testament  writings  all  those  portions  of 
the  New  Testament  then  in  circulation.  I  do  not 
feel  satisfied  as  to  this ;  but  the  expression  cer- 
tainly embraces  Paul's  epistles  along  with  the  He- 
brew canonical  writings,  as  capable  of  the  same  use, 
and  liable  to  the  same  perversions  and  misuse. 

4.  In  2  Peter  iii.  2,  there  is  also  a  clear  impli- 
cation that  the  commandment  of  the  Apostles  and 
that  of  the  Holy  Prophets  are  equally  binding. 
Writing  to  the  Hebrew  Christians,  who  certainly 
believed  in  tlie  inspiration  of  the  "  words  which 
Avere  spoken  before  by  the  holy  prophets,"  he  con- 
joins with  these,  as  having  similar  authority,  "the 
commandment  of  us,  the  Apostles  of  our  Lord  and 
Saviour." 


DIRECT   PROOFS   OF  INSPIRATION.  129 

5.  There  is  another  passage,  1  Timothy  v.  18, 
in  which  the  Apostle  Paul,  referring  to  provision 
for  the  support  of  the  ministry,  quotes  as  Scripture 
a  passage  from  Deuteronomy  xxv.  4,  and  appar- 
ently another  from  Matthew  x.  10,  or  Luke  x.  7. 
He  writes,  "  The  Scripture  saith.  Thou  shalt  not 
muzzle  the  ox  that  treadeth  out  the  corn ;  and. 
The  laborer  is  worthy  of  his  hire."  The  latter 
quotation  is  nowhere  found  in  the  Old  Testament 
(see  Leviticus  xix.  13  ;  Deuteronomy  xxiv.  14, 15)  ; 
but  our  Lord,  discussing  this  same  subject,  makes 
this  remark  on  two  different  occasions,  as  the 
Evangelists  have  recorded  it,  Luke  using  the  pre- 
cise language  that  Paul  here  employs.  If  not  a 
quotation  strictly,  it  can  only  be  understood  as  a 
proverbial  expression  employed  by  our  Lord,  a!hd 
similarly  used  by  Paul. 

6.  No  contest,  however,  is  likely  to  occur  on 
this  point,  that  the  inspiration  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment is  at  least  eqiral  to  that  of  the  Old.  Even 
without  explicit  assertions  of  it,  whatever  sanctity, 
whatever  divinity,  the  writings  of  the  Old  Covenant 
may  be  proved  to  have,  those  of  the  New  certainly 
share  in  equal  degree.  In  fact,  most  persons  now- 
adays are  disposed  to  rank  the  New  far  above  the 
Old.  If,  therefore,  we  succeed  in  maintaining  the 
true  and  proper  inspiration  of  the  older  part  of 
the  volume,  that  of  the  later  will  be  readily  con- 
ceded. 

9 


130  BIBLE  DOCTRINE  OF  INSPIRATION. 

II.     Passages  which  affirm  or  imply  the  Inspiration  of 
the  Scriptures  as  a  •whole. 

Various  titles  are  used  to  describe  the  volume 
or  collection  of  writings  now  knowai  as  the  Old 
Testament ;  and  under  all  these  titles  its  divinity 
is  attested,  moi'e  or  less  explicitly. 

1.  The  Scripture  (or  the  Scriptures'),  as  already 
shown,  was  in  our  Saviour's  time  the  well-understood 
name  of  a  definite  body  of  sacred  w^ritings.  By  this 
name  they  are  frequently  identified  with  the  utter- 
ance of  God  himself.  The  phrase,  in  one  or  other  of 
its  forms,  is  used  about  fifty  times,  and  always  means 
the  Old  Testament  alone,  except  in  the  cases  already 
alluded  to  (2  Peter  iii.  2,  16),  where  Paul's  epistles 
and  possibly  Luke's  Gospel  seem  to  be  included  with 
it.     A  few  examples  only  can  now  be  given. 

Galatians  iii.  8  :  "  The  Scripture,  foreseeing  that 
God  would  justify  the  Gentiles  by  faith,  preached 
the  Gospel  beforehand  unto  Abraham,  saying.  In  thee 
shall  all  the  nations  be  blessed."  Who  said  those 
words  ?  God,  personally.  Tlie  manner  of  the 
quotation  can  only  be  explained  on  the  principle 
that  the  Scripture  is  so  identified,  in  all  that  it 
says,  with  God  himself,  that  what  the  Scripture 
says,  God  says  ;  and  so  a  personal  utterance  of  God 
and  a  saying  of  Scripture  are  simply  equivalent. 

Romans  ix.  17  :  "  The  Scripture  saith  to  Pha- 
raoh, Even  for  this  same  purpose  have  I  raised 
thee  up."     But  it  was  God  who  said  it.     If   this 


DIRECT  PROOFS   OF  INSPIRATION.  131 

expression,  "  I  have  raised  thee  up,"  had  been  rep- 
resented by  the  Apostle  as  the  saying  of  Moses 
himself,  it  would  have  sounded  strange  and  star- 
tling as  identifying  Moses  and  God ;  but  there  is 
no  such  anomaly  in  his  thus  identifying  the  written 
Word  with  God.i 

In  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  it  is  every- 
where assumed  that  what  is  said  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment God  said.  Constantly  the  expressions  recur, 
"He  saith,"  "He  spake,"  "He  beareth  witness," 
etc.  The  living  voice  of  the  divine  speaker  is  rec- 
ognized in  the  Word.  To  adopt  tlie  language  of 
B.  F.  Westcott,  this  usage  in  Scripture  is  "  as  if 
the  author  quoting  felt  in  every  quotation  the  actual 
presence  of  Him  who  had  inspired  it,  and  spoke 
through  it."    (The  Bible  in  the  Church,  p.  42.) 

The  error  of  the  Sadducees  is  traced  by  the 
Saviour  to  their  not  knowing  "  the  Scripture,  nor 
the  power  of  God."    (Matthew  xxii.  29.)     If  they 

1  "The  Scripture  is  here  identified  with  God,  its  Author.  Tlie 
case,  as  Tholuck  remarks,  is  different  when  merely  something  con- 
tained in  Scripture  is  introduced  by  'the  Scripture  saith';  there 
'the  Scripture'  is  merely  personified.  The  justice  of  Tholuck's 
remark  will  be  apparent,  if  we  reflect  that  this  expression  could  not 
be  used  of  the  7ne?-e  ordinary  ivords  of  any  man  in  the  historical 
Scriptures,  Ahab,  or  Hezekiah,  —  but  only  where  the  text  itself 
speaks,  or  where  God  spoke,  or,  as  here,  some  mau  under  the  inspira- 
tion of  God."  (Alford,  Greek  Testament,  on  Rom.  ix.  17.)  It  is 
also  worthy  of  notice,  that,  while  the  Apostle  quotes  ordinarily  fronr 
the  Septuagint,  as  the  version  familiar  to  the  people,  he  in  this 
expression  (as  in  many  other  instances)  departs  from  it,  to  intro- 
duce a  more  literal  and  exact  translation  of  his  own  from  the  origi- 
nal Hebrew. 


132  BIBLE  DOCTRINE  OF  INSPIRATION. 

had  properly  known  and  reverenced  the  one,  they 
would  have  felt  and  enjoyed  the  other. 

The  minute  circumstances,  as  well  as  the  great 
burden,  of  Christ's  sufferings,  are  all* represented  as 
necessary  in  order  "  that  the  Scriptures  might  be 
fulfilled."  (Mark  xiv.  49  ;  xv.  28 ;  John  xix.  24, 
28,  36.)  This  points  clearly  to  the  divine  fore- 
knowledge and  authority  found  in  those  writings. 

The  expression  of  our  Lord,  "  the  Scripture  can- 
not be  broken"  (John  x.  35),  is  an  impressive 
instance  of  argument  to  the  Pharisees  based  on  a 
single  word.  He  says  it  is  in  "  your  law,"  refer- 
ring to  a  passage  in  the  Psalms  (Ixxxii.  6),  thus 
recognizing  this  as  on  a  level  with  that  portion  of 
the  Scripture  to  which  the  Jews  gave  the  highest 
honor.  The  word  "  broken "  is  here  tlie  same 
which  we  had  occasion  already  to  expound  in  con- 
nection with  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  (Matthew 
V.  17)  meaning  loosed,  abrogated  ;  and  it  assures 
us  that  "  the  Scripture,  as  the  expressed  will  of  tlie 
unchangeable  God,  is  itself  unchangeable  and  in- 
dissoluble." (Olshausen,  Comm.  in  loco.)  It  is 
furthermore  to  be  noticed  that  our  Lord  here 
argues  from  a  more  profound  sense  than  the  ordi- 
nary one  of  the  expression  employed,  and  justifies 
the  propriety  of  such  a  use  of  it  by  the  statement, 
"  the  Scripture  cannot  be  broken,"  i.  e.  not  even 
a  single  word  of  Scripture  (the  word  Gods)  can  be 
deprived  of  its  force  and  meaning. 

One  of  the  last  acts  of  our  Lord,  before  ascend- 


DIRECT  PROOFS   OF  INSPIRATION.  133 

ing  to  the  skies,  was  to  open  the  understanding  of 
the  disciples  that  they  might  "  understand  the 
Scripture  "  ;  for,  says  he,  "  thus  it  is  written,  and 
thus  it  behoved  Christ  to  suffer."  (Luke  xxiv.  45.) 
These  expressions  indicate  the  prophetic  character 
of  the  ancient  Scriptures,  and  strongly  imply  their 
divine  origin  and  infallible  truth. 

2  Timothy  iii.  16  :  "  All  Scripture  is  given  by 
inspiration  of  God,  and  is  profitable  for  teaching, 
for  reproof,  for  correction,  for  instruction  which  is 
in  righteousness." 

The  Apostle  seems  to  be  urging  this  fact  as  show- 
ing how  "  the  sacred  writings,"  which  Timothy 
has  known  "  from  a  babe  "  are  able  to  make  one 
wise  unto  salvation.  Perhaps  also  there  is  a  kind 
of  under-current  of  allusion,  as  Chrysostom  sug- 
gests, to  his  own  expected  decease  (2  Timothy 
iv.  6),  since  he  is  now  "  already  being  offered,"  as 
if  to  say,  "  Instead  of  me  you  have  the  divine 
Scriptures." 

Whether  the  word  theopneustos,  translated  "  given 
by  inspiration  of  God,"  is  here  to  be  construed  as 
an  epithet  belonging  to  the  subject  of  the  sentence 
(with  the  Canterbury  revisers),  or  as  a  predicate 
(with  the  common  version),  is  not  a  settled  ques- 
tion, though  the  weight  of  recent  authority  is  with 
the  revisers.^ 

^  Ellicott  (in  loco)  discusses  the  passage  fairly  and  ably,  as  is  his 
wont,  and  says  :  "  It  is  very  difficult  to  decide.  .  .  .  Lexicography 
and  grammar  contribute  little  towards  a  decision.  .  .  .  We  are  thus 
remanded  wholly  to  the  context,"  —  which  he  regards  as  on  the  whole 


134  BIBLE   DOCTRINE   OF   INSPIRATION. 

But  if  it  is  rendered  as  the  revisers  prefer,  "  Every 
Scripture,  inspired  of  God,  is  also  profitable,"  etc., 
the  argument  remains  substantially  the  same,  pro- 
vided we  have  due  regard  to  the  connection.  It 
implies  that  there  is  inspired  Scripture,  and  that 
is  the  main  question.  It  refers,  moreover,  unques- 
tionably to  all  "  the  Sacred  writings  "  (of  ver.  15) 
comprehended  under  the  title  Scripture,  and  with 
which  Timothy  is  expressly  declared  to  have  been 
familiar  from  childhood.  No  distinction  is  recog- 
nized or  suggested  between  Scriptures  inspired  and 
Scriptures  not  inspired,  or  only  imperfectly  or  par- 
tially inspired.  Such  a  thought  is  entirely  foreign 
to  the  context.  The  passage  then  stands  in  its  full 
force,  which  can  scarcely  be  added  to  by  any  com- 
ment, and  can  hardly  be  taken  away  by  any  subtlety 
or  ingenuity  of  exposition.    It  may  well  be  pondered. 

2.  Another  expression  for  the  Scriptures  in 
general  is  "joro/jj/iec^,"  or  "  the  prophets.^^  And  by 
this  expression  their  divine  origin  is  often  and 
distinctly  declared.  Romans  xvi.  26  :  "  The  Scrip- 
favoring  the  rendering  adojited  by  the  revisers.  But  he  distinctly 
affirms  tliat  " 2)nsa  gra^iJie  (every  Scripture)  implies  every  individual 
graphe  (Scripture)  of  those  previously  alluded  to  in  the  term  hiera 
grarnmata  (sacred  writings)."  If  the  article  had  been  used  with 
graphe,  the  interj)retation  all  Scripture  would  be  undisputed.  But 
that  graphe.  Scripture,  as  a  proper  name,  may  legitimately  omit  the 
article  (as  in  John  xix.  37,  Romans  i.  2,  xvi.  16,  2  Peter  i.  20)  is 
obvious  ; — just  as  in  all  Jerusalem  (Matthew  ii.  3),  all  Israel  (Ro- 
mans xi.  26),  all  the  house  of  Israel  (Acts  ii.  36,  1  Samuel  vii.  2,  3, 
Nehemiah  iv.  16,  Judith  viii.  6,  Matthew  x.  6,  xv.  24).  Compare 
"Winer's  Grammar,  §  18.  5  (r)  and  19.  1  (:i). 


DIRECT   PROOFS   OF   INSPIRATION.  135 

tures  of  tlie  prophets,  according  to  the  command- 
ment of  the  everlasting  God."  1  Peter  i.  10-12  : 
"Of  which  salvation  the  prophets  have  inquired  and 
searched  diligently,"  and  the  Apostle  goes  on  to 
affirm  that  "  the  Spirit  of  Christ  was  in  them  "  ; 
"to  them  it  was  revealed";  furthermore,  the  same 
things  are  "  now  preached  with  the  Holy  Ghost 
sent  down  from  heaven."  Testimony  is  given  here, 
both  to  the  prophets  of  the  Old  Testament,  and  to 
the  inspired  proclaimers  of  the  New,  as  having  the 
Spirit  of  Christ  in  them,  and  the  Holy  Ghost  sent 
down  from  heaven. 

What  is  involved  here  ?  This  name  prophet  is 
given  from  the  beginning  to  those  who  come  as 
divine  representatives,  who  speak  for  God,  and 
who  do  this  with  supernatural  aid,  direction,  and 
authority. 

Successive  stages  may  be  traced  in  the  develop- 
ment of  prophecy,  but  there  is  no  essential  change 
of  the  nature  of  the  office.  Enoch,  Noah,  Abraham, 
Melchizedek,  each  in  his  age,  and  in  his  own  way, 
stands  forth  in  God's  name ;  but  their  words  for 
the  most  part  are  not  recorded,  and  hence  pass 
away,  as  oral  utterances  naturally  do,  except  as 
preserved  and  transmitted  by  tradition. 

The  dispensation  then  changes  to  a  more  perma- 
nent form,  and  written  prophecy  begins  with  Moses. 
He  stands  at  the  head  of  this  new  prophetic  line, 
whose  words  are  to  be  recorded  and  preserved  for 
after  times.      With  Samuel  another  stage  in  ad- 


136  BIBLE  DOCTRINE  OF  INSPIRATION.       ' 

vance  is  reached.  A  revival  of  the  prophetic  order 
is  established  ;  and  from  him  a  continuous  series 
of  prophets  is  kept  up  for  centuries.  But  not  until 
the  days  of  Hosea  and  Isaiah  does  it  attain  its  full 
development ;  only  then  do  the  prophetic  communi- 
cations generally  receive  the  written  and  permanent 
form  which  enables  subsequent  ages  to  profit  by 
them. 

At  the  outset,  under  Moses,  the  true  nature  of 
the  prophetic  office  is  indicated  by  the  analogy  of 
the  relation  of  Aaron  to  Moses.  Exodus  iv.  10-16  ; 
vii.  1,  2.     (Read  these  passages.) 

A  test  is  given  for  discriminating  the  true  prophet 
from  the  false,  and  directions  to  punish  the  pre- 
tender with  severity.     Deuteronomy  xviii.  15-22. 

It  follows  plainly,  that  what  came  as  an  official 
announcement  from  an  acknowledged  prophet  was 
recognized  as  coming  from  Jehovah  himself. 

Even  when  no  distinct  assertion  is  found,  the 
place  of  any  writing  on  the  prophetic  roll  estab- 
lished its  claim.  As  Moses,  after  being  once  au- 
thenticated as  a  divine  messenger,  did  not  need  to 
repeat  each  time  he  issued  a  portion  of  the  divine 
command,  "  God  ordered  me  to  say  this,  to  wrh;e 
this,"  so  with  the  prophetic  order.  When  that  or- 
der was  once  known  and  established  as  a  "  mouth  " 
for  Jehovah,  it  was  sufficient  for  proving  the  au- 
thority of  any  word  or  writing  to  show  that  it  came 
officially  from  the  prophets.  Such  evidence  was 
open  to  the  contemporaries  of  the  Old  Testament 


DIRECT  PROOFS  OF  INSPIRATION.  137 

prophets,  to  be  judged  of  in  each  particular  case ; 
and  the  reception  of  the  writings  by  these  contem- 
poraries, their  being  handed  ctown  by  successive 
generations,  and  their  recognition  and  indorsement 
by  our  Saviour  and  the  Apostles,  and  the  New  Tes- 
tament churches,  is  the  evidence  accessible  to  us. 

In  Romans  xvi.  26,  the  Apostle  gives  thanks  to 
God  for  the  mystery  (revealed  secret)  which  is  now- 
manifested,  and  "  through  the  prophetic  Scriptures, 
according  to  the  commandment  of  the  eternal  God, 
is  made  known  unto  all  the  nations,  unto  obedience 
of  faith."  Here  the  prophetic  Scriptures,  evidently 
not  meaning  some  part,  but  the  whole,  of  the  older 
volume  of  revelation,  are  set  forth  as  the  great 
source  of  all  Christian  knowledge  unto  all  nations, 
and  this  by  the  commandment  of  the  eternal  God. 
They  are  not  superseded  or  abrogated  by  Paul's 
gospel  and  the  preaching  of  Jesus  Christ,  but 
only  confirmed,  and  given  a  wider  extension  of 
influence. 

Another  passage  which  seems  to  express  almost 
in  precise  terms  the  doctrine  we  have  been  advo- 
cating is  2  Peter  i.  19-21 :  "  We  have  the  word  of 
prophecy  made  more  sure  (confirmed  by  the  gospel 
evidences),  whereunto  ye  do  well  that  ye  take  heed, 
as  unto  a  lamp  shining  in  a  dark  (squalid  or  misty) 
place,  until  the  day  dawn,  and  the  day-star  arise  in 
your  hearts :  knowing  this  first,  that  no  prophecy 
of  Scripture  is  of  private  interpretation.  For  no 
prophecy  ever  came  (was  brought)  by  the  will  of 


138  BIBLE   DOCTRINE   OF   INSPIRATION,      x 

man ;  but  [tlie  word  holy  of  the  common  version  is 
omitted  by  the  hitcst  text  critics]  men  spake  from 
God,  being  moved  (borne  along)  by  the  Holy 
Spirit." 

We  may  observe  here,  (1)  that  "  the  word  of 
prophecy,"  "  prophecy  of  Scripture,"  "  prophecy," 
arc  all  expressions  to  denote  the  inspired  word,  the 
Old  Testament,  and  not  merely  the  predictive  por- 
tions now  commonly  called  prophecy  ;  (2)  that  this 
word  is  confirmed,  made  more  sure,  by  the  subse- 
quent revelations  ;  (3)  that  it  is  inferior  to  the 
gospel  light,  even  as  a  lamp  shining  in  a  dark 
(misty  or  squalid)  place  is  inferior  to  the  sun; 
(4)  that  notwithstanding  this  it  is  well  to  take 
heed  to  it ;  (5)  that  it  is  a  principle  of  first  impor- 
tance that  no  prophecy  is  of  private  interpretation 
(or  of  personal  disclosure)  ;  (6)  because  it  is  of 
the  very  nature  of  prophecy  not  to  come  by  human 
will ;  (7)  but  men  speak  from  God,  being  moved 
by  the  Holy  Spirit. 

Of  these  points,  it  is  only  needful  to  comment  on 
one  or  two.  The  expression  "  of  private  interpre- 
tation "  has  been  variously  understood  to  mean,  — 
a,  of  separate  or  detached  interpretation  ;  5,  of 
sjjecial  interpretation  ;  c,  to  be  interpreted  by  the 
reader  himself  (as  the  Romanists  expound  the  pas- 
sage) ;  d,  to  be  explained  or  understood  by  the 
prophet  himself ;  e,  of  self-solution  ;  f,  the  result  of 
private  or  uninspired  disclosure.  The  last  seems 
to  us  the  correct  view,  agreeing  best  with  the  force 


DIRECT  PROOFS   OF   INSPIRATION.  139 

of  the  words  and  with  the  context.  The  thought 
is  :  The  prophetic  oracles  of  the  Old  Testament 
are  worthy  of  the  most  profound  attention,  for  they 
did  not  originate  with  man,  but  with  God.  The 
word  idios  (own),  translated  "  private,"  might  be 
supposed  to  refer  to  the  prophecy,  or  the  reader,  or 
the  prophet; — the  Scripture's  own,  or  the  reader's 
own,  or  the  prophet's  own  disclosure  ;  and  so  to 
signify,  either,  The  prophecy  does  not  disclose  its 
own  meaning ;  or.  The  reader  is  not  to  interpret  it 
for  himself ;  or,  The  prophet  did  not  disclose  it  of 
himself.  That  this  last  is  the  idea  intended  seems 
to  suit  the  statement  of  ver.  19,  for  which  it  gives 
the  ground.  We  do  well  to  take  heed  to  the  word 
of  prophecy,  for  it  did  not  come  from  the  prophet 
alone,  it  is  not  of  his  own  disclosure.  It  also 
agrees  with  the  statement  which  follows  in  ver.  21, 
that  prophecy  came  not  by  the  will  of  man.  The 
use  of  the  verb  ginetai,  and  not  esti,  confirms  this 
view,  pointing  as  it  does  to  the  origination  rather 
than  the  quality  of  the  Scripture.  No  prophecy 
has  its  genesis,  comes  into  being,  or  becomes  a 
])rophecy,  by  one's  own  disclosure.  It  may  be 
added  that  the  word  idios  is  used  in  precisely  this 
sense  by  Philo  (II.  343,  ed.  Mangeyi).  "  For  a 
prophet,"  says  he,  "  advances  nothing  whatever 
of  his  own  (ouden  idion'),  but  is  an  interpreter, 
another  supplying  all  the  things  which  he  brings 
forward." 

Then,  after  denying  the  exclusively  human  origin 


140  BIBLE  DOCTRINE   OF  INSPIRATION. 

of  the  Word,  the  Apostle  describes  in  singularly 
appropriate  language  the  combined  human  and 
divine  authorship  which  is  elsewhere  implied.  The 
men  spake,  the  Spirit  moved  them.  They  spake, 
but  it  was  '■''from  God,^ — so  the  latest  critical 
text  reads.  Their  own  activity,  as  well  as  the 
divine  influence  that  acted  on  them,  is  distinctly 
indicated.^ 

3.  Another  title  applied  to  the  Scriptures  of  the 
Old  Testament  is  the  Word  of  God. 

Our  Lord,  rebuking  the  Pharisees  for  substituting 
their  traditions  for  God's  commandments,  and  set- 
ting aside  duty  to  parents  by  their  rule  as  to  what 
was  Corhan,  or  devoted  to  God,  charges  them  with 
"  making  void  the  Word  of  God  "  by  their  tradition 
(Matt.  XV.  8).  The  commandment  of  God  was 
what  Moses  had  said  :  "  Honor  thy  father  and  thy 
mother"  (Exodus  xx.  12),  and,  "He  that  speaketh 
evil  of  father  or  mother,  let  him  die  the  death" 
(Exodus  xxi.  17).  Despising  this,  or  exalting  hu- 
man suggestions  or  traditions  to  an  equality  with 
it,  is  rejecting,  frustrating,  making  void  the  Word 
of  God.     Jesus  considered  that  a  serious  offence. 


1  Dr.  Ladd  well  paraplirases  the  passage:  "No  prophecy  con- 
tained in  the  Old  Testament  Scripture  has  its  origin  as  a  matter  of 
merely  subjective  explication,  as  a  result  of  the  prophet's  own  power 
intuitively  to  discern  the  meaning  of  the  subject  he  cogitates  ;  and 
prophecy  is  never  sent  by  the  will  of  man  as  a  cause,  but  is  rather 
uttered  by  men  who  are  borne  along  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  there- 
fore speak  as  from  a  divine  source."  —  Doctrine  of  Sacred  Scripture, 
I.  162. 


DIRECT  PROOFS  OF  INSFIRATION.  141 

At  the  Feast  of  the  Dedication  at  Jerusalem, 
when  the  Jews  undertook  to  stone  him  because 
they  said  he  made  himself  God,  he  said  :  "  Is  it 
not  written  in  your  law,  I  said,  Ye  are  gods  ?  If 
he  called  them  gods  unto  whom  the  word  of  God 
came  (and  the  Scripture  cannot  be  broken)  say  ye 
of  him  whom  the  Father  sanctified  and  sent  into  the 
world,  Thou  blasphemest,  because  I  said,  I  am  the 
Son  of  God  ?  "  (John  x.  34-36.)  The  expression 
"  word  of  God  "  is  not  here  equivalent  to  the  whole 
of  the  Scripture,  but  it  refers  to  a  portion  of  it. 
The  passage  quoted  from  the  Psalms  (Ixxxii.  6)  is 
said  to  be  "  written  in  your  law,"  and  this  is  sub- 
sequently called  "  the  Scripture."  And  it  is  im- 
plied that  those  who  had  the  benefits  of  this 
revelation  had  had  the  word  of  God.  God  had 
spoken  to  them.  The  judges  were  called  gods  as 
standing,  in  a  judicial  relation,  in  God's  stead. 
Compare  Exodus  xxi.  6,  xxii.  8,  9,  28. 

The  Word,  of  course,  is  primarily  oral  ;  but  the 
expression  comes  naturally  to  be  applied,  both  in 
the  Old  Testament  and  in  the  New,  to  any  commu- 
nication from  God,  "  anything,"  as  Dr.  Ladd  says, 
"  which  God  is  regarded  as  procuring  or  permitting 
to  be  said  to  man."  (11.  503.)  Any  collection  of 
the  words  of  God  may  be  properly  styled  the  Word 
of  God,  "  because  its  content  is  from  God,  and  be- 
cause God  has  caused  it  to  be  promulgated  among 
men "  ;  "  because  it  conveys  the  truth  from  God, 
and  seeks  the  honor  of  God  "     Thus  the  voice  of 


142  BIBLE  DOCTRINE  OF  INSPIRATION. 

the  ancient  prophets  was  the  Word  of  God,  which 
shall  stand  forever  (Isaiah  xl.  8)  ;  the  preaching  of 
the  Apostles  was  the  Word  of  God  (Romans  x.  17, 
1  Corinthians  xiv.  36)  ;  it  had  been  sent  first  to 
tlie  sons  of  Israel  (Acts  x.  36,  37);  afterwards  it 
had  gone  even  into  Macedonia  and  Achaia  (1  Thcs- 
salonians  ii.  13)  ;  and  it  has  a  living  and  abiding 
energy  (1  Peter  i.  23-25). 

4.  Another  terra  quite  similar,  and  suggesting 
naturally  the  same  idea,  is  "  the  oracles  of  God  " 
(Romans  iii.  2),  "  living  oracles  "  (Acts  vii.  38). 
The  great  and  overwhelming  advantage  that  the 
Jews  had  over  the  rest  of  mankind  was,  that  "  they 
were  intrusted  with  the  oracles  of  God";  and  the 
great  sin  of  the  "  fathers  "  was  that  they  would  not 
be  obedient  unto  Moses,  "  who  received  living  ora- 
cles to  give  unto  us."  Compare  also  Hebrews  v. 
12  ;  1  Peter  iv.  11. 

These  various  expressions  describe  the  Hebrew 
sacred  books,  some  of  them  recognizing  them  as  a 
whole,  and  dealing  with  them  under  one  designa- 
tion, and  all  acknowledging  their  divine  origin  and 
authority. 

III.     Declarations  "which  affirm  the  Inspiration  of  par- 
ticular Persons,  or  single  Passages  of  the  Word. 

A  few  examples  only  of  this  kind  can  now  be 
given.  It  is  obvious  that  this  argument  avails 
mainly  to  show  the  nature  of  the  reality  of  the  in- 
fluence in  these  instances.     By  analogy,  however, 


DIRECT  PROOFS  OF  INSPIRATION.  143 

the  inference  may  be  reasonably  drawn  that  in 
other  passages  or  persons  a  similar  influence  was 
exerted.  In  whatever  sense  these  were  inspired, 
the  others  were  too  ;  for  they  stand  apparently  in 
no  respect  on  a  different  level  from  other  sacred 
writings  or  writers. 

A.  As  to  the  Old  Testament,  in  Matthew  xxii. 
43,  Jesus  says,  "  David  in  spirit  calleth  him  Lord," 
referring  to  Psalm  ex.  1.  This  seems  to  be  a  dis- 
tinct assertion  that  David  in  that  Psalm  speaks  by 
inspiration,  in  spirit ;  or  if  the  meaning  of  the  lan- 
guage there  is  doubted  by  any,  because  the  spirit  is 
not  expressly  said  to  be  the  divine  Spirit,  the  par- 
allel passage  in  Mark  xii.  36  makes  it  unmistakable, 
where  it  reads  "  by  [literally  m]  the  Holy  Spirit." 
Compare  the  same  Greek  phrase  in  Revelation 
i.  10,  iv.  2  ;  and  nearly  the  same  in  Romans  ix.  1, 
1  Corinthians  xii.  3.  It  is  a  natural  inference  that 
the  same  is  true  of  other  Psalms,  and  of  other  parts 
of  the  Word.  There  is  no  peculiarity  intimated  in 
this  110th  Psalm,  distinguishing  it  as  more  divine 
than  the  others. 

Further,  the  argument  of  our  Saviour  turns  on 
the  precis®  word  employed,  —  the  word  "  Lord  " ; 
and  therefore  indicates  something  more  than  a 
mere  general  control  of  ideas.  In  fact,  we  can 
hardly  suppose  that  David  himself,  in  this  and 
other  instances,  fully  apprehended  the  meaning  of 
his  own  words.  "  It  required,"  says  Bannerman, 
"  the  foresight  of  that  Omniscient  Spirit,  through 


144  BIBLE  DOCTRINE  OF  INSPIRATION. 

"whom  our  Lord  interpreted  David's  words,  to  mould 
them  by  his  inspiration  into  that  form  which  they 
actually  have,  and  which,  unknown  to  the  prophet, 
was  to  afford  the  materials  to  build  up  the  proof  of 
the  divinity  and  the  incarnation  of  Him,  who  was 
to  be  both  David's  Lord  and  David's  Son,"  (In- 
spiration, 328.) 

Matthew  (i.  22,  ii.  15)  represents  the  ancient 
predictions  he  refers  to  as  "  spoken  hy  the  Lord 
through  the  prophet."  This  is  as  precise  and  accu- 
rate a  description,  according  to  our  view,  as  could 
be  given  of  the  divine  authorship  and  the  human 
agency  involved.  "  The  divine  source  of  the  word, 
its  objective  verity,  and  the  inspired  consciousness 
of  the  messenger,  are  all  thus  brought  before  our 
minds."     (Ladd,  L  63.) 

In  Acts  iv.  25,  26,  the  Apostles  and  their  com- 
pany, who  presently  are  declared  to  be  all  filled 
with  the  Holy  Spirit  (vcr.  31),  lift  up  their  voice 
with  one  accord  to  God,  "  who  by  the  Holy  Spirit, 
by  the  mouth  of  David  thy  servant,  didst  say, 
Why  did  the  Gentiles  rage  ?  "  etc.,  quoting  from  the 
second  Psalm. 

In  Hebrews  iii.  7,  a  Psalm  (xcv.  7)  is  quoted 
with  the  introduction,  "  even  as  the  Holy  Spirit 
saith."  In  Hebrews  x.  15,  "  The  Holy  Spirit  bear- 
eth  witness  to  us,"  introduces  a  passage  from 
Jeremiah  xxxi.  33,  34. 

B,     As  to  New  Testament  authors. 

Acts  iv.  8  :    Peter  is  expressly  said  to  have  been 


DIRECT  PROOFS  OF  INSPIRATION.  145 

"  filled  with  the  Holy  Ghost "  in  his  address  to  the 
rulers. 

Acts  X.  28  :  Peter  affirms  that  "  God  has 
showed  "  him  the  principle  on  which  he  is  acting 
as  to  recognizing  the  Gentiles,  and  the  truth  which 
he  is  to  declare. 

Acts  xiii.  9  :  Paul  is  "  filled  with  the  Holy 
Ghost "  in  his  denunciation  of  Elymas  before  Ser- 
gius  Paulus ;  and  his  word  is  instantly  confirmed 
by  the  miraculous  blindness  which  falls  upon  the 
sorcerer. 

Further  examples  might  be  given,  but  it  is  need- 
less to  multiply  them. 

IV.     Promises  of  Inspiration. 

A.  Promises  given  to  Old  Testament  Writers. 

Among  these  may  be  mentioned, — 

Exodus  iv.  10-12  :  "  Go,  and  I  will  be  with  thy 
mouth,  and  teach  thee  what  thou  shalt  say."  This 
is  the  primary  promise  to  Moses,  and  seems  to  ex- 
press in  distinct  terms  all  that  has  been  claimed 
for  the  divine  influence  over  the  inspired  man.  It 
is  substantially  renewed  on  other  occasions, 

Deuteronomy  xviii.  18, 19  :  "I  will  raise  them  up 
a  Prophet  from  among  their  brethren  like  unto 
thee,  and  will  put  my  words  into  his  mouth  ;  and 
he  shall  speak  unto  them  all  that  I  shall  command 
him.  And  it  shall  come  to  pass  that  whosoever 
will  not  hearken  unto  my  words  which  he  shall 
speak  in  my  name,  I  will  require  it  of  him."     The 

10 


146  BIBLE  DOCTRINE  OF  INSPIRATION. 

question  is  whether  this  refers  to  the  Messiah  alone, 
or  to  a  succession  of  propliets,  or,  as  is  generally 
believed,  to  both ;  to  the  succession  of  divinely 
authorized  teachers  in  the  prophetic  order  first,  and 
to  the  Messiah  ultimately.  The  contrast  with  the 
false  prophets  in  the  next  verse  favors  the  idea  of  a 
plurality  of  true  prophets  opposed  to  them.  The 
singular  number,  however,  is  used ;  but  this  may 
,  naturally  be  applied,  in  accordance  with  a  frequent 
Hebrew  idiom,  to  a  collective  body  or  a  continuous 
order.  In  this  view  the  passage  affirms,  1.  that  the 
prophetic  function  is  not  to  cease  with  Moses,  but 
is  to  be  continued ;  2.  that  the  order  of  prophets 
will  consist  of  men  like  Moses,  native  Hebrews,  "  of 
thy  brethren " ;  3.  that  they  are  to  be.  raised  up 
from  time  to  time  by  Jehovah ;  and  4.  that  they 
should  have  His  words  put  in  their  mouth,  and 
speak  in  His  name. 

Does  not  this  cover  the  whole  ground  that  we 
claim?  The  prophets  spoke  as  God  bade  them,  and 
the  Messiah  was  the  summit  and  climax  of  the 
order,  the  ideal  and  perfect  prophet. 

Isaiah  lix.  21 :  "  My  Spirit  that  is  upon  thee, 
and  my  words  which  I  have  put  in  thy  mouth." 
This  language  describes  the  nature  of  the  divine 
influence  ;  and  the  passage  proceeds  to  declare  that 
the  teachings  thus  given  shall  be  permanently  pre- 
served in  the  lips  and  memories  of  God's  people 
through  all  time,  —  "  shall  not  depart  out  of  thy 
mouth,  nor  out  of  the  mouth  of  thy  seed,  nor  out 


DIRECT  PROOFS   OF  INSPIRATION.  147 

of  the  mouth  of  thy  seed's  seed,  saith  the  Lord, 
from  henceforth  and  forever." 

Jeremiah  i.  4-9.  "•  The  word  of  the  Lord  came 
to  me,  saying,  ...  I  ordained  thee  a  prophet  unto 
the  nations.  .  .  .  Thou  shalt  go  to  all  that  I  shall 
send  thee,  and  whatsoever  I  command  thee  thou 
shalt  speak.  .  .  .  Behold  I  have  put  my  words 
in  thy  mouth."  Such  in  general  was  the  idea  of 
the  divine  prophet  among  the  ancient  Jews,  a 
speaker  for  God,  with  divine  authority,  direction, 
and  control. 

These  quotations  may  suffice  for  illustrating  the 
ample  and  positive  manner  in  which  inspiration  is 
promised  to  the  writers  of  the  Old  Testament. 

It  is  alleged,  however,  that  the  promise  of  in- 
spiration is  made  to  the  "  entire  faithful  people 
of  the  covenant,"  and  that  "  the  inspiration  of 
Moses,  Isaiah,  or  Ezekiel  is  the  secondary  fact 
which  is  dependent  upon  the  primary."  The  proof 
given  for  this  is  that  the  Spirit  is  promised  to  Israel 
and  to  their  seed ;  that  they  are  to  be  a  kingdom  of 
priests  and  a  holy  nation ;  and  that  Moses  wishes 
that  all  the  people  were  prophets.  But  this  last  of 
itself  implies  that  they  were  not ;  and  the  other 
two  proofs  evidently  have  nothing  to  do  with  pro- 
phytic  inspiration.  This  idea  of  the  "  inspired  na- 
tion "  is  scarcely  consistent  with  the  conceded  fact 
that  every  true  Hebrew  prophet,  "  by  virtue  of  his 
office  as  prophet,  stood  between  God  and  the  theo- 
cratic people."     If  all  the  people  were  prophets  or 


148  BIBLE  DOCTRINE  OF  INSPIRATION. 

inspired,  how  could  the  prophet  stand  between 
them  and  God  ?  It  is  also  inconsistent  with  the 
special  divine  vocation  by  which  he  was  to  be  raised 
up  "  from  the  midst  of  "  the  people. 

It  should  be  remembered,  however,  that  other 
writings  besides  those  which  we  are  accustomed  to 
call  "  the  prophets  "  were  included  under  that  term 
among  the  Jews  ;  and  that  the  historical  books,  as 
we  term  them,  seem  to  have  been  prepared,  by 
those  whom  the  Jews  regarded  as  prophets,  from 
the  regular  annals  of  the  nation.  Hence  those 
books  are  known  in  the  Hebrew  Bible  as  the 
former  prophets,  while  our  prophetical  books  are 
called  the  later  prophets. 

B.    Promises  of  Inspiration  to  the  New  Tes- 
tament  Writers. 

The  chain  of  argument  on  this  important  point 
may  be  first  briefly  stated,  and  then  we  will  turn 
to  the  passages  themselves. 

1.  Christ  did  not  plan  to  carry  out  his  great 
enterprise  on  the  earth  personally.  His  public 
ministry  lasted  only  about  three  years.  He  com- 
mitted no  word  to  writing ;  in  this  respect  present- 
ing apparently  a  marked  contrast  to  other  founders 
of  permanent  institutions. 

2.  He  founded  an  Apostolic  Church,  and  left  it 
as  his  representative. 

3.  He  vested  in  his  Apostles  complete  and 
absolute  authority  under  himself,  as  to  the  admin- 


DIRECT  PROOFS  OF  INSPIRATION.  149 

istration  of  this  Church,  and  the  proclamation  of 
his  truth.  Mark  iii.  14,  15;  Matthew  xviii.  18; 
xxviii.  18 ;  Acts  i.  3-9. 

4.  To  quaUfy  them  for  this,  he  gave  repeated, 
special  promises  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 

5.  The  benefits  of  these  promises  were  shared 
with  others,  who  are  associated  with  them  and 
termed  prophets. 

These  promises  to  the  Apostles  may  be  conveni- 
ently considered  in  two  divisions.  The  first  class 
were  given  prior  to  the  last  Passover,  and,  tliough 
uttered  on  three  different  occasions,  are  substan- 
tially equivalent.  They  are  all  recorded  in  the 
Synoptic  Gospels.  The  first  is  in  Matthew  x.  14- 
20,  on  the  occasion  of  sending  forth  the  twelve, 
the  most  appropriate  opportunity  for  describing 
their  authority;  the  second  is  in  Luke  xii.  11, 12, 
when  uttering  the  discourse  to  his  disciples  sur- 
rounded by  the  many  thousands  that  crowded  on 
them  ;  the  last,  recorded  in  Mark  xiii.  9-11,  and 
Luke  xxi.  14,  15,  was  during  the  Crucifixion  week. 
These  promises,  thus  repeated,  may  fitly  be  taken 
together. 

a.  A  real  definite  influence  from  without  is 
promised  to  guide  and  suggest  what  they  should 
say.  "  It  is  not  ye  that  speak,  but  the  Spirit  of 
your  Father  that  speaketh  in  you."  It  was  to  "  be 
given  them  "  in  that  hour  what  they  should  speak. 

h.  These  promises  embrace  all  public  occasiotis, 
when  the  Apostles  must  bear  testimony  of  him, 


150  BIBLE  DOCTRINE  OF  INSPIRATION. 

before  councils,  synagogues,  kings  ;  and  this  not 
merely  for  personal  defence  and  rescue,  but  for  a 
witness  to  them  ;  and  this  witness  is  not  only  to 
Jews,  but  it  is  expressly  said  to  be  also  to  the  Gen- 
tiles. They  are  by  no  means  so  limited,  local,  and 
temporary  as  has  been  sometimes  alleged. 

c.  Now  take  into  connection  with  these  the 
promise  of  Matthew  xviii.  18,  giving  them  the  power 
of  binding  and  loosing,  and  especially  the  commis- 
sion, Matthew  xxviii.  19,  20  :  "  Go,  teach  (disciple) 
all  nations,  baptizing  and  teaching  them  all  things 
whatsoever  I  command  you  ;  and  lo,  I  am  with  you 
ahvay."  In  their  teacliing,  then,  as  well  as  in  their 
self-defence,  he  is  to  be  with  them  ;  in  every  exer- 
cise of  their  apostolic  office,  they  are  to  have  his 
presence,  aid,  and  guidance. 

Nor  does  this  extension  of  the  supernatural 
guidance  promised  to  them  seem  unreasonable.  It 
is  precisely  in  accordance  with  the  nature  of  the 
new  phase  of  their  work  upon  which  they  are 
about  to  enter.  If  it  was  important  tliat  they 
should  have  supernatural  guidance  in  their  occa- 
sional defence  of  themselves,  in  temporary  emer- 
gencies, before  courts,  how  much  more  in  their 
permanent  instructions  to  the  churches  for  all 
time  !  If  "  utterance  was  given  "  to  Paul  to  make 
known  orally  the  mystery  of  the  Gospel,  why  might 
the  divine  gift  not  be  expected  in  recording  those 
instructions  ?  What  excludes  those  occasions  and 
exigencies  from  the  promise  ? 


DIRECT  PROOFS  OF   INSPIRATION.  151 

The  second  class  of  passages  containing  the 
promise  of  the  Spirit  may  be  found  in  those  mar- 
vellous chapters  (John  xiv.-xvi.)  of  our  Lord's  last 
discourse,  in  the  evening  before  the  Crucifixion.^ 
To  bring  out  their  full  force,  we  ought  to  quote 
the  Avhole.  But  since  we  cannot  now  do  this,  let 
us  notice  specially  the  promise  of  the  abiding  influ- 
ence of  the  Holy  Spirit  to  "  bring  all  things  to  their 
remembrance,"  and  to  "  teach  them  all  things." 
(John  xiv.  25,  26.)  Their  testimony  as  eyewit- 
nesses and  companions  of  the  Saviour's  earthly  life 
was  to  be  confirmed  and  supplemented  by  that  of 
the  Holy  Spirit  given  through  them.  (John  xv. 
26,  27.)  Things  were  to  be  taught  them  which 
they  could  not  yet  bear.  The  Spirit  should  guide 
them  into  "  all  the  truth,"  declare  unto  them 
"  things  to  come,"  take  of  the  things  of  Christ,  and 
declare  unto  them.     (John  xvi.  12-15.) 

These  promises  seem  to  involve  both  revelation 
and  inspiration,  according  to  the  distinction  we 
have  drawn  between  them,  and  to  assure  the  Apos- 
tles not  only  of  the  divine  impartation  of  truth, 
which  they  did  not  yet  know,  and  could  not  now 
bear,  but  also  divine  guidance  and  control  in  every 

1  Dr.  Lee  has  aptly  styled  these  chapters  "the  Holy  of  Holies  of 
Christ's  history  ;  that  wonderful  passage,  from  every  line  of  which 
shines  forth  the  Divinity  of  Him  who  spake,  though  each  syllable 
be  tinged  with  the  sadness  of  a  Soul  which  even  now  gazed  full 
upon  the  agony  in  the  Garden,  and  bore  in  prospect  the  crown  of 
thorns,  —  syllables,  too,  which  were  uttered  from  the  very  shadow 
of  the  tomb."  —  Lee  on  Liynration,  35. 


152  BIBLE   DOCTRINE   OF  INSPIRATION. 

particular  regarding  the  proclamation  of  the  Gospel. 
Evidently,  however,  there  is  no  promise  of  omnis- 
cience, of  supernatural  information  in  all  human 
knowledge.  And  we  have  no  reason  to  claim  or  to 
suppose  that  this  was  granted.  On  this  series  of 
promises  we  have  several  remarks  to  submit. 

a.  The  peculiar  expression, "  the  Spirit  of  Truth," 
evidently  refers  to  his  special  office  of  Revealer  and 
Inspirer.  The  Spirit's  presence  might  indeed  be 
valuable  in  other  respects.  It  would  give  comfort 
and  light,  it  might  confer  miraculous  powers  of 
various  kinds.  But  this  promise  seems  to  point 
particularly  to  gifts  conferred  in  his  character  as 
the  Spirit  of  Truth,  giving  them  the  truth,  and 
enabling  them  to  give  it  to  others. 

h.  The  Spirit  was  to  "  bring  to  remembrance " 
all  that  Christ  had  said.  His  divine  teachings  are 
not  trusted  to  the  fallible  memory  of  the  men  who 
heard  them.  These  precious  deposits  are  to  be 
insured,  repeated,  presented  afresh,  in  more  con- 
densed form,  in  more  perfect  light,  in  clearer  rela- 
tions to  all  else  that  they  knew,  and  especially  to 
the  advancing  providence  and  revelations  of  God. 
The  Apostles  needed  to  be  enabled  to  recall  and 
summarize  all  that  the  Lord  had  taught  them  dur- 
ing his  earthly  life,  and  all  that  he  was  going  to 
unfold  to  their  opened  and  enlarged  understandings 
during  those  wondrous  forty  days  between  the  Res- 
urrection and  the  Ascension,  a  period  the  impor- 
tance of  which  must  not  be  estimated  by  the  space 


DIRECT  PROOFS   OF  INSPIRATION.  153 

given  to  it  in  the  narrative,  but  rather  by  the  trans- 
forming effects  which  have  been  evidently  wrought 
upon  the  timorous  and  hesitating  disciples  of  the 
Passover  evening,  by  the  time  that  we  next  meet 
them,  on  the  day  of  Pentecost. 

c.  Furthermore,  they  needed  to  be  qualified  to 
give  due  proportion  and  harmony  to  their  preach- 
ing ;  or,  as  Lee  has  expressed  it,  to  "  insert  in 
their  teaching,  without  interweaving  any  hetero- 
geneous element,  each  particular  circumstance  as 
it  contributed  to  the  elucidation  of  the  general 
scheme."     (Lee  on  Lispiration,  p.  271.) 

The  facts  of  the  gospel  history  were  of  course 
familiar  to  them ;  but  they  needed  explanation  of 
the  meaning  of  these  facts,  as  well  as  the  true 
intent  of  many  of  the  sayings  of  our  Lord,  which 
they  themselves  had  heard,  but  which  they  did  not 
yet  fairly  or  fully  appreciate.  The  relation  of  these 
great  events  to  the  plan  of  human  redemption,  to 
the  divine  counsels  in  the  past,  and  to  the  progress 
of  the  kingdom  throughout  the  ages,  was  yet  to  be 
made  known  to  them.  Their  own  faculties  were 
not  to  be  superseded,  however,  and  disused,  but  to 
be  used  and  aided.  Their  own  recollection  Avas 
to  be  employed,  but  guided  and  reinforced  by  the 
Holy  Spirit. 

d.  The  Spirit  was  to  "  teach  them  all  things," 
to  guide  them  into  "  all  the  truth."  Our  Lord  ex- 
pressly draws  the  distinction  between  the  things 
He  had  spoken  to  thom  while  yet   present  with 


154  BIBLE  DOCTRINE  OF  INSPIRATION. 

them,  and  the  teachings  of  the  Spirit  which  are  to 
be  superadded  to  them.  (John  xiv.  25,  26.)  This 
additional  light  is  not,  on  the  one  hand,  supernat- 
ural information  in  every  department  of  human 
knowledge,  as  some  have  extravagantly  inter|)reted 
it ;  nor  is  it  mere  illumination  in  saving  knowledge, 
such  as  all  converted  persons  possess,  as  others 
unduly  limit  it.  It  was  not  for  themselves  person- 
ally and  only,  but  for  tliem  officially,  and  for  the 
benefit  of  others.  It  is  expressly  connected  by  our 
Lord  with  the  intimation  that  he  had  many  things 
to  say  unto  them,  which  they  were  not  then  able  to 
bear. 

Why  the  revelation  of  divine  truth  by  God  in 
the  Old  Testament  period  should  have  been  so  slow 
and  deliberate ;  why,  in  like  manner,  it  should  have 
been  made  so  gradually  by  our  Lord  himself ;  why 
it  is  left  incomplete  even  at  this  critical  moment, 
when  he  is  leaving  the  world,  and  withdrawing 
from  the  disciples  whom  he  loved,  and  the  sinners 
for  whom  he  died, — may  be  an  interesting  question. 
But  it  is  certainly  a  fact.  And  from  considering 
it,  we  see  the  necessity  that  this  added,  advancing 
influence  should  be  given,  to  finish  the  unfinished 
work.  It  need  scarcely  be  again  remarked  here, 
that  incompleteness  is  not  error;  that  the  imper- 
fection and  inferiority  freely  acknowledged  in  the 
Old  Testament  as  compared  with  the  New,  and 
even  in  tlic  earlier  of  the  progressive  communica- 
tions of   our  Lord,  or   in   those   of   the   promised 


DIRECT  PROOFS   OF  INSPIRATION.  155 

Spirit  itself,  do  not  conflict  with  their  being  thor- 
oughly divine,  and  exactly  true,  as  far  as  they 
went.  That  which  is  imperfect  is  not  necessarily 
either  faulty  or  false. 

e.  The  Spirit  was  also  promised  to  "  show  them 
things  to  come,"  an  expression  which  implies  their 
endowment  for  predictive  as  well  as  declarative 
prophecy,  their  ability  to  describe  —  what  no  mere 
man  can  know  —  the  future. 

/.  The  earlier  promises  recorded  in  the  Synoptic 
Gospels  are  interpreted  and  confirmed  by  these 
later  promises.  In  view  of  these  legacies,  both  of 
love  and  of  authority,  which  our  Saviour  gives  in 
contemplation  of  his  immediately  impending  death, 
it  is  preposterous  to  assume  that  the  spiritual  aid 
he  had  previously  promised  to  them  was  to  be  only 
for  their  personal  defence,  and  to  be  confined  to  the 
judicial  occasions  then  specially  mentioned,  as  be- 
fore synagogues  and  magistrates.  The  promise  is 
emphasized,  renewed,  and  also  enlarged. 

It  may  furthermore  be  fairly  understood,  that 
these  additional  instructions,  given  tliem  by  the 
Holy  Spirit  subsequently  to  his  death,  had  the 
same  stamp  of  infallibility  as  those  spoken  to  them 
by  the  lips  of  the  Master  himself. 

g.  It  is  only  necessary  to  add  that  these  prom- 
ises did  not  extend  indefinitely.  Hence  the  offices 
both  of  Apostle  and  Prophet  came  to  an  end,  so 
far  as  we  can  discover,  with  the  Apostolic  age. 
There  is  no  proof  that  either  had  any  successors  in 


156  BIBLE  DOCTRINE  OF  INSPIRATION. 

office.  If  like  authority  is  claimed  for  any  others, 
the  claim  ought  to  be  supported  by  adequate  —  not 
to  say  similar  and  equal — evidence. 

The  meaning  of  these  promises  receives  further 
elucidation  from  the  record  of  the  period  between 
the  Resurrection  and  the  Ascension.  It  is  evi- 
dent, as  already  suggested,  that  the  forty  days  of 
our  Saviour's  mysterious  life  on  earth  after  the 
Resurrection  were  no  mere  pause  in  the  progress 
of  events,  but  made  a  decided  advance  in  the  teach- 
ing, and  in  the  preparation  of  the  Apostles  for 
their  great  work.  Even  prior  to  his  death  the  in- 
structions had  become  more  frequent,  more  clear, 
more  impressive  and  precious ;  they  had  revolved 
more  about  the  central  doctrines  and  eternal  reali- 
ties, as  the  Great  Teacher  approached  the  appointed 
death  of  which  he  had  so  tenderly  warned  them. 
And  now,  in  this  interval,  there  are  plentiful  in- 
dications that  he  both  opened  their  understand- 
ings, and  presented  to  their  opened  understandings 
quickening  truths ;  so  that  the  Apostles,  after  their 
brief  course  of  instruction  under  tliis  new  school- 
ing, came  out  widely  different  men  from  the  vacil- 
lating, trembling,  earthly-minded  fugitives,  Avho, 
six  weeks  before,  had  all  forsaken  him  and  fled. 
The  chiefs  of  modern  Rationalism,  such  as  Paulus 
and  Strauss  (compare  Lee,  p.  269),  have  not  been 
able  to  withhold  the  acknowledgment  that  this 
transformation  in  the  character  and  conduct  of 
the  Apostles  is  inexplicable,  unless  "  something  ex- 


DIRECT  PROOFS  OF  INSPIRATION.  157 

traordmary  be  supposed  to  have  occurred  durijig 
this  interval." 

On  the  very  evening  which  closed  that  ever 
memorable  first  day  of  the  week  on  -which  our 
Lord  rose  from  the  dead,  he  comforted  and  recom- 
missioned  his  affrighted  disciples,  saying  :  "•  Peace 
be  unto  you ;  as  the  Father  hath  sent  me,  even 
so  send  I  you.  And  when  he  had  said  this,  he 
breathed  on  them,  and  saith  unto  them.  Receive 
ye  the  Holy  Spirit :  whose  soever  sins  ye  forgive, 
they  are  forgiven  unto  them ;  whose  soever  sins 
ye  retain,  they  are  retained."  (John  xx.  21-23.) 
But  even  this  formal  imparting  of  the  Holy  Spirit 
is  not  enough. 

It  is  distinctly  recorded  that  he  afterwards  not 
only  expounded  to  them,  as  he  had  done  before, 
that  all  things  which  are  written  in  the  Law  of  Mo- 
ses, and  in  the  Prophets,  and  in  the  Psalms  con- 
cerning him  must  be  fulfilled,  but  he  also  "  opened 
their  mind,  that  they  might  understand  the  Scrip- 
tures" (Luke  xxiv.  45).  At  the  same  time  he 
renewed  the  assurance  that  he  would  send  forth 
"  the  promise  of  the  Father "  upon  them,  and  en- 
joined on  them  to  tarry  in  the  city  until  they  were 
clothed  with  power  from  on  high. 

In  addition  to  those  personal  teachings  of  our 
risen  Saviour,  when  the  day  of  Pentecost  was  fully 
come,  the  Spirit  was  given.  Too  much  stress  can 
hardly  be  laid  on  this  fact.  Better  even  than 
the  presence  of  Jesus  himself  are  these  promised 


158  BIBLE  DOCTRINE  OF  INSPIRATION. 

communications.  And  they  are  continued  during 
their  ministry,  varied  and  adapted  to  all  the  con- 
tingencies that  arose  in  their  official  duties.  The 
Apostles,  from  that  notable  day,  were  entirely  dif- 
ferent men.  They  were  endued  anew,  and  in 
higher  measure  than  ever  before,  with  power  from 
on  high. 

An  unmistakable  example  of  the  influence  of  the 
divine  Spirit  in  imparting  new  truth  is  the  case  of 
Peter  at  Joppa,  learning  by  the  vision,  and  by  the 
Spirit's  manifestation  at  CaBsarea,  the  true  rela- 
tion of  the  Gentiles  to  the  Church  of  Christ.  He 
expressly  states  that  his  new  position  was  not 
something  evolved  or  reasoned  out  by  himself  from 
the  truths  already  known,  but  revealed  to  him  by 
God  in  antagonism  to  his  former  prejudices  and 
opinions.  God  had  "  showed  it "  to  him  (Acts 
X.  28). 

From  this  whole  line  of  argument,  then,  it  ap- 
pears that  promises  of  Inspiration  were  distinctly 
and  repeatedly  made  to  writers  both  of  the  Old  and 
of  the  New  Testament.  We  do  not  believe  that 
there  was  any  breach  of  these  promises,  or  that 
they  in  any  respect  failed  to  be  fulfilled. 

V.     Assertious  of  Inspiration  by  the  Sacred  Writers. 

Of  course  assertions  of  this  kind  by  men  them- 
selves, unsupported  and  unattested,  would  have  no 
weight  whatever.  Mohammed  or  Joe  Smith  could 
make  such  assertions. 


DIRECT  PROOFS  OF  INSPIRATION.  159 

But  the  assertions  of  the  sacred  writers  form  an 
important  link  in  the  chain  of  argument,  when 
taken  in  connection  with  the  character  of  the  men  ; 
and  when,  on  the  one  hand,  the  divine  promises 
going  before  are  considered,  and  on  the  other  the 
miraculous  confirmations  accompanying  and  follow- 
ing, "  the  Lord  working  with  them  and  confirming 
the  Word  with  signs  following."  These  men  are 
thoroughly  authenticated,  it  must  be  remembered, 
as  in  some  sense  teachers  sent  from  God.  That, 
for  Christians,  is  a  settled  point.  The  question 
now  is.  What  claims,  as  such,  do  they  make  for 
themselves  ? 

A.  In  the  Old  Testament  a  few  of  the  passages 
may  be  quoted  :  — 

2  Samuel  xxiii,  2,  David  says :  "  The  Spirit  of 
the  Lord  spake  by  me,  and  his  word  was  in  my 
tongue." 

Isaiah  i.  2  :  "  Hear,  0  heavens,  and  give  ear,  0 
eartli,  for  the  Lord  hath  spoken."  Compare  Isaiah 
xl.  5  :  "  The  mouth  of  the  Lord  hath  spoken." 

Jeremiah  i.  4-10 :  "  The  word  of  the  Lord  came 
unto  me,  saying,"  etc.  ..."  Then  the  Lord  put 
forth  his  liand,  and  touched  my  mouth  :  and  the 
Lord  said  unto  me,  Behold,  I  have  put  my  words 
in  thy  mouth."  Jeremiah  xv.  19:  "  If  thou  return, 
then  will  I  bring  thee  again,  that  thou  mayest  stand 
before  me  ;  and  if  thou  take  forth  the  precious  from 
the  vile,  thou  shalt  be  as  my  mouth." 

Ezekiel  i.  3  :  "  The  word  of  the  Lord  came  ex- 


IGO  BIBLE   DOCTRINE   OF   INSriRATION. 

prcssly  to  Ezekiel,  the  priest,  and  the  hand  of  the 
Lord  was  upon  him."  (Compare  iii.  4,  10,  11, 
17,  27.) 

These  expressions  certainly  convey  the  idea  that 
the  prophets  claimed  to  be  speaking,  not  their  own 
words,  but  those  with  whicli  they  had  been  in- 
trusted by  God.  It  is  needless  to  multiply  similar 
passages. 

B.  Assertions  of  Inspiration  by  the  New  Testa- 
ment writers. 

It  is  unquestionable  that  they  do  lay  claim,  in 
numerous  ways  and  on  various  occasions,  to  an 
authority  more  than  human,  as  will  be  presently 
shown  by  quotations.  No  principle  can  possibly  be 
stated  which  would  limit  these  claims  to  those  pre- 
cise occasions,  or  forbid  their  extension  to  other 
official  communications  of  these  same  individuals. 
Their  authority  rested  generally  on  their  well-known 
character  as  the  accredited  representatives  of  the 
Almighty,  speaking  in  his  name  to  men.  They 
only  repeated  or  urged  anew  their  claim  of  divine 
authority,  when  it  was  questioned,  or  when  some 
special  reason  required  its  assertion.  Elsewhere  it 
is  quietly  taken  for  granted. 

While  frankly  admitting  their  own  fallibility  in 
conduct,  and  imperfection  in  grace,  and  liability  to 
mistake  in  everything  but  this  for  which  they  are 
inspired,  these  writers  fearlessly  claim  to  be  heard 
as  from  God  in  the  proclamation  of  the  Gospel,  and 
as  to  the  concerns  of  the  soul.     Against  any  rejec- 


DIRECT  PROOFS   OF  INSPIRATION.  161 

tion  or  neglect  of  that  message,  they  warn  men 
with  the  utmost  energj^  and  with  tearful  anxiety 
and  tenderness.  The  doctrine  which  they  teach 
they  did  not  derive  from  study,  did  not  reason  out 
for  themselves;  and  they  did  not  take  credit  to 
themselves  for  acquiring  it,  or  devoting  themselves 
to  it.  It  is  all  due  to  the  holy  impulse  and  enlight- 
ening influence  of  the  Spirit  of  God. 

Their  authority  they  represent  as  equal  to  that 
of  the  Old  Testament  prophets.  The  Church- is 
built  "  upon  the  foundation  of  the  Apostles  and 
prophets."  (Ephesians  ii.  20.)  Now  there  is  no 
question  that  the  Jews  of  that  time,  as  well  as  these 
Christian  teachers,  held  the  inspiration  of  the  Old 
Testament  prophets ;  and  if  the  Apostles  are  found 
claiming  to  be  regarded  as  on  an  equal  footing 
with  the  prophets,  there  is  no  stronger  form  in 
which  they  could  assert  their  own  inspiration. 

If  it  is  alleged  that  this  guidance  and  aid  were 
restricted  to  oral,  not  written,  teaching, —  (1)  we 
would  ask,  Why  ?  Can  any  valid  reason  be  as- 
signed? ^  (2)  Divine  authority  is  expressly  claimed 
by  them  for  their  written  word.  See  1  Corinthians 
xiv.  37  :  "  If  any  man  thinketh  himself  to  be  a 
prophet,  or  spiritual,  let  him  take  knowledge  of  the 
things  which  I  write  unto  you,  that  they  are  the 

1  In  case  the  disciples  should  commit  to  writing  these  com- 
mandments, whether  as  embodied  in  words  or  in  deeds,  and  whether 
for  the  purpose  of  discipling  the  nations  or  of  instructing  their 
converts,  the  promise  of  Christ  woidd  surely  not  be  withdrawn.  — 
Ladi>,  I.  76. 

11 


162  BIBLE   DOCTRINE   OF  INSPIRATION. 

conimandment  of  the  Lord."  Compare  John  xx.  31; 
2  Thessalonians  ii.  15;  1  Corinthians  ii.  13. 

Let  us  now  consider  some  of  the  passages  in 
which  these  claims  are  made  hy  writers  of  the 
New  Testament. 

Acts  XV.  1-6,  28.  The  Apostles  and  elders  at 
Jerusalem,  in  the  decision  given  upon  the  question 
from  Antioch,  say,  "  It  seemed  good  to  the  Holy 
Ghost,  and  to  us." 

Romans  xvi.  25-27.  The  Apostle  Paul  conjoins 
his  own  preaching  with  "  the  Scriptures  of  the 
prophets,  according  to  the  commandment  of  the 
eternal  God,"  as  the  source  of  Christian  knowledge 
unto  "  all  the  nations." 

The  case  of  the  Apostle  Paul  is  somewhat  pecu- 
liar, and  therefore  we  have  in  his  case  special 
abimdance  of  evidence.  He  was  not  one  of  the 
original  twelve.  His  authority,  however,  is  not 
based  simply  on  the  inspiration  which  men  would 
persuade  us  belonged  to  the  Christian  community 
as  a  whole  (of  which  we  discover  no  suitable  evi- 
dence) ;  nor  on  that  which  he  might  claim  as  a 
prophet,  which  might  have  been  adequate ;  nor  on 
his  adoption  into  their  order,  and  recognition  by 
the  original  Apostles ;  but  on  his  special  call  and 
commission  as  an  Apostle  by  Jesus  Christ  himself. 
He  had  received  the  truth  not  from  human  sour- 
ces, even  the  highest  and  most  direct,  but  from 
the  Lord  Jesus  personally  by  an  internal  disclos- 
ure (Galatians  i.  11,  16)  ;  he  has  seen  the  Lord 


DIRECT   PROOFS   OF  INSPIRATION.  163 

(1  Corinthians  xv.  10,  Acts  xxii.  6)  ;  he  has  had 
abundant  evidence  subjectively  and  objectively  of 
his  Apostlcship  (Romans  i.  1,  5;  1  Corinthians 
ix.  1,  2). 

1  Corinthians  ii.  1-16.  In  consequence  of  di- 
visions in  the  cliurch  at  Corinth,  Paul  is  led  to  de- 
clare his  own  apostolic  authority.  Negatively,  he 
says  that  his  proclamation  of  the  mystery  of  God 
was  not  with  excellency  of  speech  or  of  wisdom, 
not  with  man's  wisdom,  not  the  wisdom  of  the 
world.  Positively,  it  was  God's  wisdom  in  a  mys- 
tery, spoken  in  demonstration  of  the  Spirit,  re- 
vealed by  God  through  the  Spirit.  And  not  only 
docs  he  thus  ascribe  to  God  the  communication  of 
the  knowledge  to  him  (revelation),  but  also  the 
words  in  which  it  is  conveyed  by  himself  to  other 
men  (inspiration)  ;  "  which  things  also  we  speak, 
not  in  words  which  man's  wisdom  teachetli,  but 
wliich  the  Spirit  tcacheth."  Here  is  a  clear  refer- 
ence to  God,  not  only  of  the  doctrine  taught,  but  of 
the  form,  the  words,  in  which  it  is  taught. 

1  Corinthians  xiv.  37  :  "  If  any  man  thinketh 
himself  to  be  a  prophet  or  spiritual,  let  him  ac- 
knowledge the  things  which  I  write  unto  you,  that 
they  are  the  commandment  of  the  Lord."  It  is  a 
test  of  discipleship  that  they  acknowledge  his  regu- 
lations in  church  matters  as  from  the  Lord. 

2  Corinthians  xiii.  2,  3.  He  claims  official  control 
in  the  church  :  "  I  write  to  them  who  heretofore 
have  sinned  and  to  all  other,  that,  if  I  come  again. 


164  BIBLE   DOCTRINE   OF   INSPIRATION. 

I  will  not  spare,  seeing  that  ye  seek  a  proof  of 
Christ  that  speaketh  in  me."  And  this  is  not  as 
to  some  abstract  truth  which  he  has  declared,  but 
as  to  the  application  of  the  principles  of  Christian 
discipline  in  correcting  particular  cases  of  disorder. 

Galatians  i.  8-12  :  "  But  though  we,  or  an  angel 
from  heaven,  should  preach  unto  you  any  gospel 
other  than  that  which  we  preached  unto  you,  let 
him  be  anathema.  As  we  have  said  before,  so  say 
I  now  again.  If  any  man  preacheth  unto  you  any 
gospel  other  than  tliat  which  ye  received,  let  him 
be  anathema.  For  am  I  now  persuading  men, 
or  God?  or  am  I  seeking  to  please  men?  If  I 
were  still  pleasing  men,  1  should  not  be  a  servant 
of  Christ.  For  1  make  known  to  you,  brethren,  as 
touching  the  gospel  which  was  preached  by  me, 
that  it  is  not  after  man.  For  neither  did  I  receive 
it  from  man,  nor  was  I  taught  it,  but  it  came  to 
me  through  revelation  of  Jesus  Christ."  Nothing 
but  a  distinct  conviction  and  assurance  from  above 
of  his  own  authority  as  an  inspired  man  could  war- 
rant the  claims  Paul  here  puts  forth.  He  had  not 
received  his  doctrine  from  men,  not-  even  from  the 
other  Apostles.  And  if  any  proclaim  a  different 
gospel  —  even  if  he  himself  should,  or  if  an  angel 
from  heaven  should  do  it  —  he  denounces  with  the 
utmost  severity  such  a  departure  from  the  gospel 
which  he  had  proclaimed. 

In  Ephesians  ii.  20,  the  Apostles  and  prophets 
are  classed  together,  and  are  represented  as  the 


DIRECT  PROOFS   OF  INSPIRATION.  165 

foundation  on  which  Christians  are  built,  Jesus 
Christ  himself  being  the  chief  corner  stone.  It  is 
immaterial  here  whether  the  prophets  be  under- 
stood to  be  those  of  the  Old  Testament,  or  of  New 
Testament  times.  The  authority  which  Paul  at- 
tributes to  "  the  prophets  "  is  well  understood.  He 
ranks  the  Apostles  with  them,  and  places  both  in 
fundamental  connection  with  Jesus  Christ  himself. 
This  teaching  of  the  Apostles  and  prophets,  then, 
is  a  sure  foundation,  infallibly  true  and  certain. 

In  Ephesians  iii.  1-7,  Paul  claims  that  God  by 
revelation  made  known  to  him  the  mystery  "  which 
in  other  ages  was  not  made  known  unto  the  sons 
of  men,  as  it  is  now  revealed  unto  his  holy  Apostles 
and  prophets  by  the  Spirit ; "  and  that  of  this  gospel 
he  was  "  made  a  minister  according  to  the  gift  of 
the  grace  of  God,  given  unto  him  by  the  effectual 
working  of  His  power,"  It  is  by  the  agency  of  the 
Spirit,  by  the  effectual  working  of  divine  power, 
that  this  knowledge  has  been  communicated  to 
him,  and  to  the  other  Apostles  and  prophets. 

1  Thessalonians  ii.  13,  he  thanks  God  that  "  when 
ye  received  the  word  of  God  which  ye  heard  of  us, 
ye  received  it  not  as  the  word  of  men,  but,  as  it  is 
in  truth,  the  word  of  God."  It  was  divine  teach- 
ing, though  received  by  them  from  Imraan  lips, 
and  it  is  matter  of  continual  rejoicing  that  they 
received  it  as  such.  Here  is  a  sharp  contrast  be- 
tween simply  human  instruction  —  persuasion,  ar- 
gument, the  word  of  men  —  and  divine  instruction, 


166  BIBLE  DOCTRINE  OF  INSPIRATION. 

authoritative  assertion,  the  word  of  God ;  and  the 
apostolic  teaching  is  expressly  said  to  be  of  the 
latter  kind. 

1  Thessalonians  iv.  2,  8,  15  :  "  Ye  know  what 
commandments  we  gave  you  by  the  Lord  Jesus." 
"•  He  therefore  that  despiseth,  despiseth  not  man, 
but  God,  who  hath  also  given  us  his  Holy  Spirit." 
"  This  we  say  unto  you  by  the  word  of  the  Lord," 
giving  a  statement  as  to  the  wondrous  future  events 
at  the  Resurrection  day. 

2  Thessalonians  ii.  13-15.  He  points  to  the  two- 
fold influence  exerted  in  their  salvation  by  "  sancti- 
fication  of  the  Spirit  and  belief  of  the  truth."  To 
this  they  had  been  called  by  "  our  gospel,"  and 
accordingly  they  are  to  "stand  fast  and  hold  the. 
traditions  which  ye  have  been  taught,  whether  by 
word  or  by  our  epistle."  The  power  of  the  Spirit 
and  that  of  the  truth  are  here  intimately  associated. 
That  truth  they  had  learned  through  the  preaching 
of  the  Apostle ;  and,  if  they  are  to  stand  fast  in  the 
salvation  they  have  received,  it  is  to  be  by  faithful 
adherence  to  the  teachings  they  had  obtained  from 
Paul.  Moreover,  it  makes  no  difference  whether 
these  teachings  were  oral  or  written.  They  were 
equally  binding,  equally  authoritative,  equally  con- 
nected with  salvation. 

1  Peter  i.  10-12.  The  inspiration  of  the  Old 
Testament  writers  is  here  shown  to  be  no  mere 
modification  or  exaltation  of  their  own  unaided 
faculties,  but  the  impartation  of  capacity  and  au- 


DIRECT  PROOFS  OF  INSPIRATION.  1G7 

thority,  by  "the  Spirit  of  Christ  which  was  in 
them,"  to  speak  on  subjects  wliich  they  did  not 
otherwise  understand,  and  to  record  things  the 
meaning  of  which  they  were  still  left  to  search  and 
inquire  diligently  into.  Furthermore,  the  procla- 
mation of  the  Gospel  in  New  Testament  times  was 
"  by  the  Holy  Spirit  sent  forth  from  heaven." 

2  Peter  iii.  1,  2.  An  equal  place  is  claimed  in 
the  attention  and  confidence  of  the  people  for 
"  the  words  that  were  spoken  before  by  the  holy 
prophets,"  and  "  the  commandment  of  us  the  Apos- 
tles of  the  Lord  and  Saviour."  The  Canterbury 
Revision  adopts  a  different  reading,  and  translates 
the  last  clause  "the  commandment  of  the  Lord  and 
Saviour  through  your  Apostles."  Tliis  would  not 
vary  materially  the  evidence,  but  presents  our 
doctrine  in  rather  more  distinct  terms. 

Revelation  i.  1-3,  10,  11,  19.  The  Book  of  Rev- 
elation  opens  with  a  vision  of  God,  and  a  command 
to  John,  such  as  had  been  formerly  given  to  Mo- 
ses, to  write  in  a  book  what  he  sees.  The  assur- 
ance is  afterwards  given  that  this  communication 
is  from  the  same  Almighty  One,  "  the  Lord  God 
of  the  holy  prophets." 

Revelation  xxii.  6,  7,  18,  19.  The  angel  snys, 
"These  words  are  faithful  and  true ;  and  the  Lordj 
the  God  of  the  spirits  of  the  prophets,  sent  his  an- 
gel to  show  unto  his  servants  the  things  that  must 
shortly  come  to  pass."  There  is  added  a  most 
solemn  warning  against  adding  to,  or  taking  away 


168  BIBLE  DOCTRINE  OF  INSPIRATION. 

from,  the  words  of  the  book  of  this  prophecy,  on 
peril  of  incurring  all  tlie  plagues,  and  forfeiting  all 
the  blessings  of  the  eternal  world. 

Considering  this  whole  series  of  claims  put  forth 
by  the  Apostles  and  their  associates,  it  is  impossible 
to  overlook  the  formal  and  public  position  assumed 
by  the  Apostles  as  tlie  introducers,  under  the  au- 
thority of  Jesus  Christ,  of  the  new  revelation  ;  nor 
the  distinct  connection  of  this  with  the  old  revela- 
tion, their  reverence  for  which  is  well  known  and 
universally  acknowledged ;  nor  the  tone  of  author- 
ity and  command  which  men,  who  were  not  ambi- 
tious but  humble,  not  self-seekers  and  worldly,  but 
self-sacrificing  and  spiritual,  assume  in  addressing 
their  fellow  men  as  to  the  concerns  of  their  souls. 

VI.  Passages  in  which  the  Union  of  the  Human  and 
Divine  Authorship  of  Portions  of  Scripture  is 
expressly  recognized. 

The  special  feature  of  our  doctrine  of  Inspiration, 
which  may  probably  excite  question  among  those 
unfamiliar  with  the  subject,  is  the  thorough-going 
ascription  of  a  divine  character  to  those  parts  of 
the  Bible  which  are  most  obviously  and  unmistak- 
ably human.  According  to  our  view,  indeed,  there 
is  no  part  of  the  Bible  which  does  not  show  clearly 
the  marks  of  human  origin.  This  is  the  first  and 
most  obvious  of  the  "  phenomena  "  and  also  of  the 
"  claims "  of  Scripture,  —  that  it  is  written  by 
Moses,  David,  Isaiah,  Paul,  and  other  men;   and 


DIRECT  PROOFS  OF  INSPIRATION.  1G9 

this  is  equally  true  of  those  portions  the  human 
authors  of  which  are  unnamed  and  unknown.  But 
we  have  endeavored  to  show  that  this  is  not  incon- 
sistent with  the  real  divine  authorship. 

The  divine  origin  is  as  strongly  and  as  distinctly 
affirmed  as  if  there  had  been  no  human  instrumen- 
tality involved.  The  human  agency  is  also  as 
clearly  and  unmistakably  presented  as  if  there  had 
been  no  divine  interposition  in  the  case.  We 
believe  that  much  of  the  error  and  difficulty  that 
have  arisen  in  the  minds  of  devout  and  earnest  in- 
quirers are  due  to  looking  exclusively  at  one  or  the 
other  of  these  classes  of  facts.  It  may  therefore 
be  useful,  as  a  confirmatory  proof  on  this  special 
point,  to  present  some  passages  of  Scripture  where 
the  union  of  the  human  and  the  divine  element  in 
the  same  utterance  is  distinctly  stated  or  recog- 
nized ;  where  the  same  words  are  quoted  and  as- 
cribed indifferently  and  equally  to  God  and  to  man 
as  their  author.  A  few  examples  of  this  kind  will 
be  sufficient  to  demonstrate  the  possibility  and  the 
actuality  of  such  a  union  ;  and  that  is  all  that  is 
practically  necessary  for  our  argument. 

The  commandment,  "  Honor  thy  father  and  tby 
mother  "  (Exodus  xx.  12),  is  quoted  (Matthew  xv. 
4)  under  the  expression,  "God  said";  and  again 
(Mark  vii.  10)  the  Saviour  is  represented  as  say- 
ing, "  Moses  said." 

The  language  of  the  Psalm  (ex.  1),  "  The  Lord 
said  unto  my  Lord,"  etc.,  is  quoted  (Mark  xii.  36) 


170  BIBLE   DOCTRINE   OF  INSPIRATION. 

with  the  expression,  "  David  said  by  the  Holy- 
Spirit,"  which  really  presents  both  sides  of  the 
truth  in  the  single  statement ;  in  the  succeeding 
verse  (Mark  xii.  37)  the  same  Evangelist  informs 
us  that  our  Saviour  adds,  "  David  himself  calleth 
him  Lord."  Compare  Matthew  xxii.  43,  "  How 
then  doth  David  in  the  Spirit  call  him  Lord  ?  "  It 
is  difficult  to  see  in  what  more  explicit  language 
both  the  authorship  by  David  and  the  inspiration 
by  the  Spirit  could  be  affirmed  ;  or  what  higher 
testimony  could  be  adduced  than  that  of  Him  who 
was  at  once  both  God  and  man. 

The  arginncnt  of  our  Lord  from  the  expressions 
in  which  Jehovah  is  called  "  the  God  of  Abraham, 
the  God  of  Isaac,  and  the  God  of  Jacob  "  (Exodus 
iii.  G,  15),  is  worthy  of  special  attention.  He  gives 
it  (Matthew  xxii.  31)  as  that  which  was  "  spoken 
unto  you  by  Gud  "  ;  again  (Luke  xx.  37),  as  wliat 
"  Moses  showed  at  the  bush,"  etc. ;  while  Mark 
(xii.  26),  who  is  noted  for  giving  minute  details 
and  precise  circumstances,  combines  both  ideas, 
and  presents  the  language,  "  Have  ye  not  read  in 
the  book  of  Moses,  in  (the  place  concerning)  the 
Bush,  how  God  spake  unto  him,  saying,  I  am  the 
God  of  Abraham  ? "  etc.  It  is  not  necessary  to  our 
purpose  here  to  vindicate  our  Lord  from  the  charge 
of  using  "  Rabbinical  dialectic  "  and  illogical  argu- 
mentation. God  had  spoken  thus  to  Moses  (Exo- 
dus iii.  6),  and  bade  him  speak  the  same  things  to 
the  people  (Exodus  iii.  15).     Luke  shows  that  our 


DIRECT  PROOFS   OF  INSPIRATION.  171 

Lord  emphasized  the  fact  of  its  coming  through 
Moses,  — "  Even  Moses  showed."  Our  Lord  au- 
thoritatively expounds  the  passage  in  a  deeper 
sense  than  the  obvious  one,  and  shows  that  "  the 
Eternal  would  not  make  and  avow  such  a  covenant, 
save  with  those  whose  existence  is  permanent." 
(Broadus  on  Matthew  xxii.  31.) 

That  frequently  quoted  passage  (Isaiah  vi.  10), 
in  reference  to  the  fat  heart,  and  heavy  ears,  and 
closed  eyes  of  the  people,  is  referred  to  by  the  Apos- 
tle Paul  (Acts  xxviii.  25)  :  "  Well  spake  the  Holy 
Spirit  by  Isaiah  the  prophet  unto  your  fathers," 
etc. ;  while  John  (xii.  39-41)  declares,  "  Isaiah  said 
again,"  and,  "  These  things  said  Isaiah,  because  he 
saw  his  glory." 

The  Apostle  Peter  in  like  manner  says,  "  It  was 
needful  that  the  Scripture  should  be  fulfilled,  which 
the  Holy  Spirit  spake  before  by  the  mouth  of  David 
concerning  Judas"  (Acts  i.  16);  thus  combining 
both  ideas  in  the  one  phrase.  (See  Acts  iv.  25,  &c.) 

So  too  Matthew  (i.  22,  ii.  15)  employs,  in  quot- 
ing, the  expression  "  spoken  by  the  Lord,  through 
the  prophet "  (Rev.  Version)  ;  not  "  of  the  Lord  by 
the  prophet,"  as  the  Common  Version  translates, 
which  is  now  ambiguous,  being  conformed  in  its 
use  of  the  prepositions  to  antique  rather  than  to 
modern  English ;  though  it  was  unquestionably  in- 
tended to  convey  precisely  what  we  understand  it 
to  mean,  namely,  that  the  speaking  was  primarily 
and  fundamentally  the  Lord's,  and  tliat  the  utter- 


172  BIBLE  DOCTRINE  OF  INSPIRATION. 

ance  of  .this  divine  message  was  through  the  prophet 
speaking  for  him.  No  line  of  discrimination  is 
to  be  drawn  between  the  human  and  the  divine 
portions  of  Scripture. 

In  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  not  only  portions 
from  the  express  words  of  Jehovah  as  recorded  in 
the  Old  Testament  are  quoted  with  the  expressions, 
"  God  saith,"  "  the  Holy  Spirit  saith,"  "  the  Holy 
Spirit  also  is  a  witness  to  us,"  but  even  the  words 
of  Jeremiah  and  David.  Each  of  the  three  great 
divisions  of  the  Scriptures  (the  Law,  the  Prophets, 
and  the  Psalms)  is  thus  referred  to.^  (Hebrews 
iii.  7 ;  ix.  8  ;  x.  15.) 

Turning  to  the  New  Testament  Apostles  and 
prophets,  in  their  inspired  testimony,  it  is  apparent 
that  their  human  characteristics  and  circumstances 
are  intended  to  be  employed  as  natural  means  of 
enforcing  their  witness  and  giving  it  the  utmost 
credibility.  The  fact  of  their  being  personal  eye- 
witnesses is  again  and  again  insisted  on.  Yet  this 
human  personality  of  theirs  is  not  in  the  slightest 

1  In  this  remarkable  epistle,  God,  or  the  Holy  Ghost,  is  continu- 
ally named  as  the  speaker  in  the  passages  quoted  from  the  Old 
Testament;  and  this  not  merely  in  those  of  which  it  is  said  in  the 
context  of  the  Old  Testament  Scriptures,  "God  said,"  but  also  in 
those  in  which  some  human  being  speaks,  e.  g.  David,  as  composer 
of  a  Psalm.  In  this  the  view  of  the  author  clearly  expresses  itself 
as  to  the  Old  Testament  and  its  writers.  He  regarded  God  as  the 
Principle  that  lived,  and  wrought,  and  spoke  in  them  all  by  his 
Holy  Spirit;  and  accordingly  Holy  Scripture  was  to  him  a  pure  work 
of  God,  although  announced  to  the  world  by  man.  —  Olshausen, 
Die  Echtheit  des  N.  T.,  p.  170. 


DIRECT  PROOFS   OF  INSPIRATION.  173 

degree  incompatible  with  their  utterance  being  at 
the  same  time  the  message  of  God.  And  the  com- 
bhiation  of  the  two  testimonies  is  expressly  brought 
to  view  in  such  passages  as  John  xv.  26,  27, 
"  When  the  Comforter  is  come  ...  he  shall  bear 
witness  of  me ;  and  ye  also  bear  witness,  because 
ye  have  been  with  me  from  the  beginning."  Luke 
xxiv.  48,  49,  "  Ye  are  witnesses  of  these  things. 
And  behold  I  send  forth  the  promise  of  my  Father 
(the  Spirit)  upon  you ;  but  tarry  ye  in  the  city, 
until  ye  be  clothed  with  power  from  on  high." 
And  among  the  very  last  words  spoken  to  them  by 
our  Lord  on  Olivet,  just  before  he  ascended,  he 
said,  "  Ye  shall  receive  power,  when  the  Holy 
Spirit  is  come  upon  you  ;  and  ye  shall  be  my  wit- 
nesses .  .  .  unto  the  uttermost  parts  of  the  earth," 
(Acts  i.  8.) 

Accordingly,  the  Apostles,  in  the  presence  of  the 
Council,  declare :  "  And  we  are  witnesses  of  these 
things ;  and  so  is  the  Holy  Spirit,  whom  God  hath 
given  to  them  that  obey  him."  (Acts  v.  32.)  And, 
when  assembled  for  consultation  at  Jerusalem,  on 
the  subject  of  circumcision,  they  give  their  decisions 
under  the  form,  "  It  seemed  good  to  the  Holy 
Spirit  and  to  us  "  (Acts  xv.  28)  ;  which  style,  ob- 
serves the  judicious  Hooker,  "  they  did  not  use  as 
matching  themselves  in  power  with  the  Holy  Ghost, 
but  as  testifying  the  Holy  Ghost  to  be  the  Author, 
and  themselves  but  only  utterers  of  that  decree." 
(Ecclesiastical  Polity,  Book  III.  c.  10.) 


174  BIBLE  DOCTRINE  OF  INSPIRATION. 

The  doctrine  indicated  in  these  passages  is  pre- 
cisely what  we  have  been  endeavoring  to  advocate, 
and  to  show  to  be  the  Scriptural  doctrine  of  Inspi- 
ration. If  we  have  succeeded  in  proving  this,  our 
end  has  been  attained.  Those  for  whose  special 
benefit  this  discussion  has  been  designed  will  readily 
admit  that  whatever  representation  the  Scriptures 
make  on  the  subject  is  the  true  one. 

In  conclusion,  we  have  to  observe  that  the  force 
and  effect  of  the  various  arguments  exhibited  are 
not  to  be  obtained  by  considering  each  apart,  but 
by  combining  them,  and  taking  the  whole  result. 
Each  one  does  not  bear  alone  the  whole  weight  of 
the  conclusion.  As  Bishop  Butler  has  well  said  of 
the  evidence  for  Christianity,  so  the  evidence  for 
Inspiration  combines  many  things  "  of  great  variety 
and  compass,  .  .  .  making  up,  all  of  them  together, 
one  argument ;  the  conviction  arising  from  which 
kind  of  proof  may  be  compared  to  what  they  call 
the  effect  in  architecture  or  other  w^orks  of  art,  a 
result  from  a  great  number  of  things  so  and  so 
disposed,  and  taken  into  one  view."  (Analogy, 
Part  II.  c.  7.) 

It  has  been  shown  that  there  is  a  reasonable  pre- 
sumption that  God  in  giving  a  revelation,  as  it  is 
agreed  He  has  done,  would  inspire  it ;  that  the 
proper  source  and  kind  of  evidence  to  prove  that 
He  has  actually  inspired  the  Bible  is  in  its  own 
statements  and  phenomena ;  that  this  conclusion  is 


DIRECT  PROOFS   OF  INSPIRATION.  175 

established,  —  (1)  By  the  general  manner  of  quot- 
ing Scripture  in  Scripture ;  (2)  by  passages  which 
afiirm  or  imply  the  inspiration  of  the  Scriptures  as 
a  whole  ;  (3)  by  declarations  afiirming  the  inspira- 
tion of  particular  persons  or  passages ;  (4)  by 
promises  of  inspiration  to  the  sacred  writers ; 
(5)  by  assertions  of  inspiration  by  the  sacred 
writers ;  (6)  by  passages  in  which  that  union  of 
tlie  human  and  the  divine  authorship  which  we 
have  seen  to  be  implied,  is  ex])ressly  recognized. 
Thus  the  Bible  statements  on  the  subject  have  been 
considered,  in  general  and  in  detail,  as  classified 
and  part  by  j)art. 

It  remains  only  to  submit  our  minds  frankly  and 
lovingly  to  the  combined  influence  of  all  God's 
ivords  about  his  Word,  and  to  join  with  peaceful 
confidence  in  the  prayer  and  the  assurance  of  our 
Lord  Jesus,  —  "  Sanctify  them  in  the  truth  :  Thy 
Word  is  Truth." 


part  CljiiU 
OBJECTIONS    CONSIDERED. 


12 


part  Cljirtr. 

OBJECTIONS    CONSIDERED. 

IT  remains  only  that  we  give  a  brief,  but  full  and 
frank  consideration  of  the  principal  objec- 
tions that  have  been  urged  against  the  Doctrine  of 
Plenary  Inspiration,  which  we  have  endeavored  to 
expound  and  establish. 


CHAPTER  I. 
OBJECTIONS  FROM  SCRIPTURE, 

CERTAIN  passages  of  Scripture  are  urged,  in 
which  it  is  alleged  that  some  of  the  sacred 
writers  disclaim  inspiration,  at  least  in  the  cases 
mentioned ;  and  from  this  it  is  attempted  to  infer, 
somewhat  illogically,  that  the  disclaimer  applies 
equally  to  all  that  is  contained  in  the  Bible,  even 
if  written  by  entirely  different  men.  Let  us  can- 
didly examine  these  passages,  and  see  what  they 
imply. 

Luke  i.  3.  "  It  seemed  good  to  me  also,  having 
traced  the  course  of  all  things  accurately  from  the 
first,  to  write  unto  thee  in  order,"  etc. 


180  BIBLE  DOCTRINE  OF  INSPIRATION. 

To  some  this  claim  of  careful  and  accurate  in- 
quiry seems  to  conflict  with  the  idea  of  assistance 
or  direction  from  a  supernatural  source.  They 
assume  apparently  that  there  could  be  no  inspira- 
tion except  as  to  the  record  of  such  things  as  were 
derived  exclusively  from  revelation.  But  this  is 
an  unwarranted  assumption.  And  certainly  that  is 
not  the  view  of  inspiration  for  which  we  contend. 

If  Luke  had  denied  that  there  was  any  other 
source  of  information  than  these  inquiries  of  his, 
or  that  he  had  any  aid  from  above  in  the  arrange- 
ment of  the  materials,  however  gathered,  this  ob- 
jection might  have  some  validity  as  against  the 
Revelation  or  Inspiration  of  the  two  historical 
books  of  his  composition ;  though  even  then  it 
would  be  necessary  to  show  that  this  denial  affected 
the  other  books  of  the  Bible.  But  there  is  no  posi- 
tive disclaimer  of  that  sort,  nor  even  any  implied 
denial  here.  While  asserting  this  diligent  search 
and  comparison  of  information,  he  nowhere  distin- 
guishes between  the  authority  of  the  things  so  de- 
rived, and  the  facts  concerning  which  he  makes  no 
reference  to  such  sources. 

The  case  might  be  illustrated  by  supposing  that 
Peter,  while  claiming  to  have  been  an  eyewitness 
of  the  Redeemer's  transfigured  majesty,  and  there- 
fore worthy  to  be  believed  in  reference  to  that  event 
on  the  ground  of  his  personal  testimony,  had  de- 
nied, instead  of  affirming,  that  on  other  subjects  he 
"  preached  the  Gospel  with  the  Holy  Ghost  sent 


OBJECTIONS  FROM  SCRIPTURE.  181 

down  from  heaven."  If  he  had  denied  it,  there 
would  have  been  evidence  of  the  absence  of  divine 
agency  or  authority.  But  as  he  makes  no  such 
distinction  between  the  different  parts  of  his  teach- 
ing, and  no  disclaimer  of  inspiration  as  to  any  part, 
this  reference  to  his  personal  observation  and  expe- 
rience on  a  particular  point  does  not  invalidate  his 
general  authority.  Neither  does  Luke's  allusion  to 
his  diligent  investigations  invalidate  his  authority. 
He  was  as  really  controlled  in  the  record  of  what 
he  knew  natui'ally  by  personal  observation,  and  of 
what  he  learned  by  inquiry  and  diligent  research, 
as  in  the  communication  of  what  he  received  by 
direct  revelation.  And  this  control  is  what  we 
mean  by  inspiration. 

The  question  is  a  different  one,  when  it  is  asked 
on  what  ground  Luke's  writings  are  accepted  as 
inspired,  when  he  was  not  an  Apostle.  Tliat  ques- 
tion belongs  to  the  subject  of  the  Canon,  and  does 
not  properly  come  up  here.  But  it  may  be  remarked 
that  the  general  recognition  of  his  Gospel  and  of 
the  Acts  by  the  churches  during  the  lifetime  of  the 
Apostles,  and  his  intimate  association  with  Paul, 
lead  to  the  inference  that  he  was  to  be  classed 
among  the  prophets  or  apostolic  men  to  whom  in- 
spiration was  granted.  The  same  thing  substan- 
tially may  be  said  in  regard  to  the  Gospel  according 
to  Mark,  who  was  similarly  associated  with  Peter. 

1  Corinthians  vii.  6-25.  In  this  passage  the 
Apostle  gives  directions  concerning  sundry  practical 


182  BIBLE  DOCTRINE   OF  INSPIRATION. 

questions  of  difficulty,  as  to  marriage,  separation  of 
married  people,  etc.,  about  which  the  Corinthians 
had  written  to  him. 

In  reference  to  the  propriety  of  marriage  in  gen- 
eral for  most  people,  he  says,  ver.  6,  "  I  speak  this 
by  permission  "  (Revised  Version  and  Bible  Union 
Version,  hy  ivaij  of  permission'),  "and  not  of  com- 
mandment," i.  e.  in  the  way  of  an  indulgence  or 
allowance  to  you,  not  as  a  commandment  which  I 
enjoin.  There  is  no  reference,  as  some  (judging 
only  from  our  English  version)  have  imagined,  to 
the  difference  in  the  authority  by  which  he  speaks 
in  the  different  cases,  as  if  the  origin  or  nature  of 
that  authority  were  in  question.  Even  if  the  mean- 
ing were,  that  in  this  case  he  was  only  permitted, 
not  commanded,  by  the  Spirit  to  utter  what  he  did, 
the  objection  would  have  no  weight  against  the 
doctrine  of  Inspiration  ;  because,  if  this  teaching 
was  permitted  by  the  Spirit,  it  could  not  be  opposed 
to  the  truth,  and  to  the  will  of  God  as  expressed  in 
his  other  teachings.  But  both  the  language  itself, 
when  properly  translated  so  as  to  be  free  from  am- 
biguity, and  tlie  connection  of  the  argument,  make 
it  clear  that  the  contrast  intended  is  not  between 
things  which  Paul  is  permitted  and  other  things 
which  he  is  commanded  to  speak,  but  between 
things  which  Paul  in  his  Apostolic  character  per- 
mits or  allows,  but  does  not  command,  and  other 
things  which  he  commands.  To  marry  is  not 
wrong,  nor  to  abstain  from  marriage.     "  Marry,  if 


OBJECTIONS  FROM  SCRIPTURE.  183 

you  think  best ;  I  speak  this  by  way  of  permission, 
not  as  a  commandment." 

We  may  compare  with  this  a  corresponding  ex- 
pression in  2  Corinthians  viii.  8,  10.  Addressing 
the  Corinthians,  and  commending  to  their  imita- 
tion the  great  liberality  of  the  churches  of  Macedo- 
nia, he  says,  "  I  speak  not  by  commandment " 
(Rev.  Ver.  hy  way  of  eo7n7nandment),  i.  e.  not  as 
giving  a  command,  "  but  I  give  my  advice  "  (Rev. 
Yqv.  judgment'),  "for  this  is  expedient  for  you." 

So  far  the  matter  is  really  quite  plain,  and  all 
respectable  commentators  agree  as  to  the  meaning. 
The  real  difficulty,  or  the  point  on  wliich  the  ob- 
jection is  based,  begins  in  the  tenth  verse  of  the 
passage  in  1  Corinthians  vii.  10-25. 

In  ver.  10,  the  Apostle  says,  "  I  command"  (Rev. 
Ver.  give  charge),  ^^ yet  not  I,  but  the  Lord":  in 
ver.  12,  "to  the  rest  speak"  (Rev.  Ver.  say)  "I, 
not  the  Lord":  in  ver.  25,  "Concerning  virgins  I 
have  no  commandment  of  the  Lord ;  yet  I  give 
my  judgment." 

It  is  alleged  that  there  is  here  a  contrast  be- 
tween different  portions  of  what  he  speaks,  as 
being  part  of  them  of  divine  origin  and  authority, 
and  part  his  own  opinion,  human,  fallible,  and 
therefore  uncertain  ;  part  God's  commandment,  and 
part  man's  own  suggestion  merely. 

This  is  evidently  not  the  contrast  intended.  It 
is  not  a  distinction  between  what  is  authoritative 
and   what   is   not  so,  but   between  that  which  he 


184  BIBLE  DOCTRINE   OF  INSPIRATION. 

speaks  simply  reiterating  the  express  words  of  the 
Lord  Jesus,  personally  uttered,  and  that  which  he 
speaks  by  inspiration,  not  having  any  words  of 
Jcsiis  to  quote.  Both  are  authoritative,  both  di- 
vine ;  but  the  first  coming  from  Christ  primarily, 
and  the  other  coming  in  the  first  instance  to 
Paul  himself,  and  through  him  to  the  Corinthian 
church.i 

It  need  scarcely  be  remarked  that  "  the  Lord," 

^  Dr.  Ladd,  while  admitting  clearly  that  "  the  distinction  here 
called  for  is  not  that  between  the  words  of  an  Apostle  when  in- 
sjtired,  and  the  words  of  the  same  Apostle  when  not  inspired," 
alleges  that  the  teachings  of  Jesus  personally  are  infallible  and 
permanent,  but  that  the  "other  contents  of  truth"  are  "mixed 
with  possible  error,  since  they  came  by  remoter  inferences  from  the 
truth  of  Christ,  and  were  given  in  the  trustworthy  yet  fallible 
judgments  of  the  Apostles."  Accordingly,  he  thinks  that,  besides 
the  " unerpiivocal  declarations  of  the  mind  of  Christ,"  and  "cer- 
tain wise  teachings  of  an  inspired  Apostle,  the  acceptance  of  which 
was  ethically  best  for  those  to  whom  he  wrote,"  there  are  here 
"certain  erroneous  opinions,  the  rejection  of  the  practical  applica- 
tion of  which  was  best  for  the  same  persons.  Among  these  last 
may  we  class  the  opinions  and  preferences  into  which  the  Apostle 
was  led  by  his  erroneous  impression  as  to  the  nearness  of  the  Sec- 
ond Coming."     Doctrine  of  Sacred  Scripture,  I.  203,  205. 

We  venture  humbly,  notwithstanding,  to  agree  with  Paul's  opin- 
ions and  advice,  so  guardedly  and  yet  frankly  expressed,  as  "good 
by  reason  of  the  (then)  present  distress  "  ( ver.  26) ;  and  also  to  ques- 
tion whether  he  was  in  any  error  as  to  the  immediate  nearness  of 
the  Second  Coming.  He  did  not  know  when  it  would  be.  Nei- 
ther did  the  other  Apostles  (Acts  1.  7  ;  1  Thessalonians  v.  1,  2). 
Neither  did  our  Lord  during  his  earthly  sojourn  (Mark  xiii.  32). 
But  they  all  taught  the  duty  of  living  with  constant  reference  to  it, 
and  in  a  state  of  cheerful  expectancy  of  it  (Matthew  xxiv.  42  ;  1  Co- 
rinthians i.  7  ;  Titus  ii.  13  ;  2  Peter  iii.  12).  And  Paul  earnestly 
admonished  his  Thessalonian  brethren  against  imagining  that  "the 
day  of  the  Lord  was  at  hand  "  (2  Thessalonians  ii.  1-3). 


OBJECTIONS   FROM   SCRIPTURE.  185 

in  Acts  and  the  Epistles,  is  the  standing  and  ha- 
bitual designation  for  the  Lord  Jesus  personally. 
This  is  well  understood  and  admitted  by  all  careful 
students  of  the  New  Testament. 

There  are  three  questions  here  as  to  the  law  of 
marriage,  which  naturally  arose  in  the  early  Chris- 
tian churches,  in  their  hand  to  hand  conflict  with 
heathenism.  These  questions  pertained,  —  (1)  to 
the  married  in  general  (ver.  10)  ;  (2)  to  the  special 
cases  of  mixed  marriages,  where  one  party  was  a 
believer  and  the  other  not  (ver.  12)  ;  and  (3)  to 
the  unmarried  (ver.  25).  As  to  the  first,  the  Lord 
Jesus  had  personally  laid  down  the  law.  (See  Mark 
X.  2-12.)  From  that  there  was  no  appeal,  and  to 
that  nothing  could  be  added.^  To  those  already 
married  Paul  says,  "  I  command,  yet  not  I,  but  the 
Lord."  He  simply  repeats  and  enjoins  what  Jesus 
the  Lord  had  commanded  with  his  own  lips. 

As  to  the  other  two  cases,  Christ  had  given 
no  specific  commandment.  These  questions  had 
scarcely  arisen  during  his  brief  personal  ministry. 
So  the  Apostle  proceeds  to  give  his  own  decision 

^  On  1  Corinthians  vii.  10,  De  Wette  observes  :  "  Hitherto  the 
Apostle  has  spoken  from  his  own  judgment  illuminated  by  the  Holy 
Ghost  (ver.  40)  ;  so  also  in  what  follows  (ver.  12,  25,  40)  ;  but  here 
(ver.  10)  he  appeals  to  an  expression  of  the  Lord  (Mark  x.  12)." 
And  Meyer  says  :  "The  Apostle  was  conscious  that  his  individual- 
ity was  under  the  influence  of  the  Holy  Ghost  (ver.  40).  He  there- 
fore distinguishes,  here  and  in  verses  12  and  25,  not  between  his 
own  and  insjured  commands,  but  between  those  which  proceeded 
from  his  own  inspired  subjectivity,  and  those  which  Christ  himself 
maintained  by  his  objective  word." 


186  BIBLE  DOCTRINE   OF  INSPIRATION. 

as  to  mixed  marriages.  And  this  he  clearly  means 
to  be  authoritative,  for  he  adds :  "  So  ordain  I  in 
all  the  churches"  (ver.  17).  It  is  not  a  mere  in- 
dividual opinion,  thrown  out  casually,  uncertain, 
local  and  temporary  in  its  application.  In  the  Old 
Testament  dispensation  a  somewhat  different  law 
had  prevailed  as  to  mixed  marriages.  According 
to  the  Mosaic  Law,  such  a  union  was  not  to  be 
formed  at  all  between  Israelites  and  Gentiles,  be- 
tween Jehovah's  worshippers  and  idolaters.  And 
when  formed,  under  the  peculiar  circumstances 
prevailing,  for  example,  after  the  exile,  such  hea- 
then or  foreign  wives  were  to  be  resolutely  and 
invariably  put  away.  This  was  done  even  in  cases 
which  seemed  to  involve  great  severity  and  dis- 
tress. See  Ezra  x.  2-19;  Nehemiah  xiii.  23-27. 
But  Paul  enjoins  that  now  the  believing  or  Chris- 
tian party  shall  not  abandon  the  other,  a  rule 
which  needed  direct,  original,  divine  authority  to 
establish  and  enforce  it,  as  he  does  "  in  all  the 
churches." 

As  to  virgins,  the  unmarried,  he  has  no  com- 
mandment of  the  Lord,  that  is,  no  express  word  of 
Jesus  to  quote,  but  he  proceeds  to  give  advice 
suited  to  the  peculiar  circumstances,  —  giving  sug- 
gestions, but  laying  down  no  universal  rule.  He 
closes  this  discussion  (ver.  40)  by  saying,  "  I  think 
also  that  I "  (Rev.  Ver.  I  think  that  I  also)  "  have 
the  Spirit  of  God."  There  are  some  who  regard 
this  passage  as  expressing  Paul's  doubt  of  his  own 


OBJECTIONS  FROM   SCRIPTURE.  187 

inspiration.  Because  Paul  says  he  thought  he  had 
the  Spirit  of  God,  they  are  quite  sure  that  he  had 
not.  They  represent  it  as  implying  uncertainty  in 
his  own  mind  as  to  his  divine  authorization,  or  as 
to  his  possessing  the  Spirit.  This  is  certainly  not 
his  meaning.  So  far  from  that,  in  this  same  epistle, 
having  referred  to  the  existence  of  miraculous  gifts 
in  the  church,  one  of  which  was  the  discerning  of 
spirits,  he  says,  "  If  any  man  think  himself  to  be  a 
prophet  or  spiritual,  let  him  acknowledge  that  the 
things  that  I ivrite  unto  you  are  the  commandments 
of  the  Lord."     1  Corinthians  xiv.  37. 

Romans  vi.  18,  19.  "  I  speak  after  the  manner 
of  men."  What  docs  the  Apostle  mean  by  this  ? 
He  has  just  spoken  of  the  believer  as  the  slave  of 
righteousness.  He  adds  that  this  is  but  a  human 
illustration,  drawn  from  human  affairs,  and  must 
not  be  misapplied.  The  expression  "  slave  "  must 
not  be  strained  to  imply  severity,  compulsion,  re- 
luctance, injustice.  It  only  conveys  the  idea  of  the 
relation  of  entire  ownership  and  consecration,  in 
which  the  Christian  delights  to  stand  towards  holi- 
ness and  God.  "  I  have  used  an  illustration,"  he 
would  say,  "  drawn  from  human  relations,  on  ac- 
count of  the  intellectual  infirmity  of  your  flesh, 
because  you  need  such  figures  to  set  the  truth  viv- 
idly before  you."  Thus  he  is  speaking  after  the 
manner  of  men,  but  with  no  renunciation  of  the 
divine  authority  with  which  he  speaks. 

2  Corinthians  xi.  17.     "  That  which  I  speak,  I 


188  BIBLE  DOCTRINE   OF  INSPIRATION. 

speak  not  after  the  Lord,  but  as  in  foolishness." 
Does  he  mean  that  he  is  speaking  nonsense,  that 
he  is  deliberately  and  purposely  making  himself  a 
fool  ?  Certainly  not.  Just  before  he  had  said, 
"  I  say  again.  Let  no  man  think  me  foolish  ;  but  if 
ye  do,  yet  as  foolish  receive  me,  that  I  also  may 
glory  a  little."  It  is  the  outgushing  of  his  ardent, 
affectionate  heart,  grieved  that  he  should  be  mis- 
judged and  mistreated  by  those  for  whom  he  had 
toiled  so  devotedly,  yet  only  pouriug  forth  more 
freely  out  of  tliat  pierced  and  wounded  heart  the 
zealous  desires  he  had  ever  felt  for  their  welfare. 
"  Grant  that  I  am  a  fool,  put  me  in  the  position 
of  a  fool,  if  you  will ;  it  has  been  for  your  sake 
that  I  have  acted  thus,  and  even  if  counted  by 
you  as  foolish,  I  deserve  your  sympathy  and 
consideration." 

The  language  is  plainly  ironical,  assuming,  for 
the  sake  of  argument,  that  what  some  of  them  are 
charging  him  with  is  correct,  and  showing  tliat 
even  on  that  ground  he  could  boast,  if  so  inclined, 
of  more  abundant  labors  and  sacrifices  for  them 
and  for  the  Gospel. 

But  it  is  said,  he  alleges  that  he  speaks  not  only 
"  as  in  foolishness,"  but  "  not  after  the  Lord  "  ; 
and  that  this  must  mean  that  he  is  at  least  then 
not  under  the  influence  of  inspiration.  If  this  in- 
terpretation be  correct,  and  if  he  here  disclaims  it 
in  regard  to  this  apparent  self-boasting  to  which 
he  is  compelled  by  the  unworthy  and  ungrateful 


OBJECTIONS   FROM   SCRIPTURE.  189 

depreciation  of  his  labors  among  the  Corinthians, 
would  not  the  express  exception  in  this  case  only 
confirm  more  incontestably  the  general  claim  that 
elsewhere  he  is  speaking  the  mind  of  the  Lord  ? 

But  it  is  admitted,  even  by  those  (as  Meyer  and 
Alford)  who  regard  Paul  as  in  this  passage  denying 
"  the  theopneustic  character  of  the  utterance  in  the 
stricter  sense,"  that  this  is  done  "  without  his  lay- 
ing aside  the  consciousness  of  the  Spirit's  guidance? 
under  which  he,  for  his  purpose,  allows  the  human 
emotion  temporarily  to  speak."  Meyer  adds,  that 
"  Bengel  aptly  says  :  But  even  this  passage,  and 
the  exception  peculiar  to  this  passage,  he  so  wrote 
according  to  a  rule  of  divine  propriety,  being  in- 
structed by  the  Lord." 

Hodge,  on  the  other  hand  however,  thinks  as  we 
do  that,  even  in  this  very  passage,  "  Such  an  utter- 
ance is  not  inconsistent  with  the  Apostle's  claim  to 
inspiration.  For  the  simple  end  of  inspiration  is 
to  secure  infallibility  in  the  communication  of 
truth.  It  does  not  sanctify,  nor  does  it  preclude 
the  natural  play  of  the  intellect  or  of  the  feelings. 
Even  if  therefore  this  conduct  of  Paul  was  due  to 
human  weakness,  that  would  not  prove  that  he  was 
not  under  the  inspiration  of  God.  But  such  an 
assumption  is  needless.  There  was  nothing  wrong 
in  his  self-laudation.  He  never  appears  more 
truly  humble  than  when  these  references  to  his 
labors  and  sufferings  were  wrung  from  him,  filling 
him  with  a  feeling  of  self-contempt.     All  that  the 


190  BIBLE  DOCTRINE  OF  INSPIRATION. 

expression  implies  is,  that  self-praise,  in  itself  con- 
sidered, is  not  the  work  of  a  Christian  ;  it  is  not 
the  work  to  which  the  Spirit  of  Christ  impels  a 
believer.  But  when  it  is  necessary  to  the  vindica- 
tion of  truth  or  the  honor  of  religion,  it  becomes  a 
duty."     (Hodge  in  loco.} 

Must  we  not  accept  the  testimony  of  the  Apostle, 
that  even  in  this  glorying  "  the  truth  of  Christ  is 
in  "  him  (vcr.  10),  and  that  his  object  in  what  ex- 
poses him  to  misconstruction  is  a  pure  and  noble 
one,  so  that  he  can  appeal  confidently  to  the 
divine  judgment  in  the  matter,  —  "  God  knoweth" 
(ver.  11)  ? 

2  Corinthians  xii.  2,  3.  "  Whether  in  the  body, 
or  out  of  the  body,  I  cannot  tell ;  God  knoweth  "  ; 
literally  (as  in  Rev.  Ver.),  "  whether  in  the  body, 
I  know  not ;  or  whether  out  of  the  body,  I  know 
not ;  God  knoweth," 

This  passage  is  adduced  to  show  that  there  were 
some  things  which  Paul  admits  he  did  not  know ; 
and  from  this  confessed  limitation  of  his  knowledge 
it  is  inferred  that  he  cannot  have  been  inspired. 

But  this  inference  would  only  be  just  on  the 
ground  that  inspiration  implied  omniscience,  which 
no  one  attempts  to  claim.  That  there  were  some 
things  which  God  knew,  and  which  Paul  did  not, 
does  not  invalidate  his  real  inspiration.  Does  it  ? 
If  it  did,  would  any  real  inspiration  be  possible  or 
conceivable  in  any  man  ?  Is  it  not  obvious  that  the 
objection  is  grounded  on  such  a  notion  of  inspira- 


OBJECTIONS  FROM  SCRIPTURE.      191 

tion  as  is  utterly  impracticable,  and  such  as  no 
intelligent  advocate  of  inspiration  holds  ? 

1  Corinthians  i.  16.  "  I  know  not  whether  T  bap- 
tized any  other."  A  somewhat  similar  argument 
is  based  on  this  passage  as  upon  the  one  last  men- 
tioned. It  is  said  :  Here  is  a  matter  on  which 
Paul's  mind  is  in  doubt  as  to  a  matter  of  fact.  He 
remembers  distinctly  that  he  baptized  Crispus  and 
Gaius,  and  the  household  of  Stephanas,  in  whose 
providential  and  helpful  presence  he  is  rejoicing 
(xvi.  7).  He  does  not  remember  whether  he  bap- 
tized any  other.  His  memory  is  at  fault.  Hence, 
says  Alford,  "  the  last  clause  is  important  as 
against  those  who  maintain  the  absolute  omniscience 
of  the  inspired  writers  on  every  topic  which  they 
handle.''^ 

But  we  do  not  allege  their  omniscience  on  every 
subject,  or  even  on  any  subject ;  only  that  all  that 
they  say  is  accurate,  and  is  uttered  under  divine  di- 
rection and  authority.  As  Hodge  says, "  We  learn 
that  inspiration  was  an  influence  which  rendered 
its  recipients  infallible,  but  it  did  not  render  them 
omniscient.  They  were  preserved  from  asserting 
error,  but  they  were  not  enabled  either  to  know  or 
to  remember  all  thino-s." 


CHAPTER  II. 

OBJECTION    FROM    TPIE    EXISTENCE    OF 
DIFFICULTIES. 

THE  general  fact  of  tlie  existence  of  Difficulties 
and  Obscurities  in  the  Bible  is  urged  as  a 
proof  that  it  cannot  be  inspired.  It  is  assumed  by 
some  that,  if  it  were  inspired,  there  would  be  none  ; 
that  everything  coming  from  God  must  necessa- 
rily be  perfect,  in  the  sense  of  being  free  from  all 
deficiency,  and  therefore  from  all  obscurity  as  well 
as  liability  to  error. 

We  answer,  that  this  is  an  unwarranted  assum|> 
tion.  On  the  contrary,  it  might  be  expected  tliat 
there  would  be  difficulties  in  the  Bible,  notwith- 
standing it  is  inspired;  and  this  is  reasonably 
inferrible,  — 

a.  From  the  nature  of  human  language,  which 
is  an  incomplete  medium  for  the  expression  of 
thought,  ambiguous  often,  changeable  in  the  lapse 
of  time,  and  always  liable  to  be  misinterpreted. 

b.  From  the  nature  of  the  mind,  which  is  limited 
in  its  capacities,  defective  in  the  power  of  steady 
attention,  frequently  partial  and  one-sided  in  its 
investigations  even  when  thoroughly  sincere,  and 


EXISTENCE  OF  DIFFICULTIES.  193 

often  prejudiced  unconsciously.  Some  obscurities 
arise  from  the  eye  that  sees,  rather  than  from  the 
nature  of  the  object  seen.  Better  eyesight  would 
lay  many  a  ghost,  and  clearer  minds  would  remove 
many  difficulties. 

c.  From  the  nature  of  the  truths  revealed.  "  A 
Bible  without  difficulties  would  be  a  firmament 
without  stars."  Such  a  one  would  have  to  omit 
many  subjects  on  which  the  Bible  instructs  and 
cheers  man,  and  could  not  touch  some  of  the  sub- 
limest  truths  that  the  Bible  actually  presents. 
Some  of  these  things  are  abstruse  and  elevated, 
some  apparently  conflicting,  but  having  their  con- 
nections and  harmonious  relations  established, 
where  they  meet  up  yonder  in  a  sphere  higher  than 
human  observation  can  now  reach. 

d.  From  the  nature  of  God  himself,  who  from 
his  infinity  cannot  be  thoroughly  comprehended  by 
any  finite  intelligence.  All  that  we  are  competent 
to  understand  of  him  is  just  what  he  has  revealed,  — 
parts  of  his  ways.  The  man  who  thinks  he  abso- 
lutely comprehends  anything  infinite  only  shows 
the  shallowness  of  his  comprehension. 

e.  From  the  analogy  of  all  God^s  communications 
to  man  in  nature.  The  obscurities  in  his  word 
and  those  in  his  works  correspond.  The  same 
characteristics  are  found  in  both  revelations, — in 
the  Bible  and  in  the  universe.  The  grand  work  of 
Bp.  Butler,  his  "  Analogy  of  Natural  and  Revealed 
Religion,"  is  chiefly  devoted  to  exhibiting  this  fact, 

13 


194  BIBLE  DOCTRINE  OF  INSPIRATION. 

and  specially  shows  that  like  obscurities  are  to  be 
expected,  and  are  found  in  each.  That  book  has 
been  before  the  world  of  thinkers  for  several  gener- 
ations. It  has  not  been  answered  or  set  aside,  and 
it  is  safe  to  say  it  never  will  be. 

f.  From  the  corruption  of  mankind,  by  which 
the  understanding  has  been  darkened,  and  rendered 
averse  to  truths  that  would  be  amply  clear  and 
satisfactory  to  a  pure  soul. 


CHAPTER   III. 

OBJECTIONS    FROM    ALLEGED    DISCREPANCIES 
OR    MISTAKES. 

THE  subject  is  a  very  large  one,  and  a  full  dis- 
cussion of  it  would  take  one  over  almost 
every  part  of  the  Bible,  and  be  obviously  inconsist- 
ent with  the  limits  of  a  volume  like  this. 

1.  Some  general  suggestions  in  regard  to  these 
alleged  mistakes,  as  a  mass,  may  be  profitably 
made  ;  as,  for  example  :  — 

a.  Many  of  these  are  founded  on  misinterpreta- 
tion of  Scripture.  It  is  said  that  the  New  Testa- 
ment writers  misunderstood  and  misapplied  tlie 
Old  Testament ;  were  controlled  by  the  false  preju- 
dices of  their  age  ;  were  guilty  of  illogical  argu- 
ment. But  these  allegations  cannot  be  sustained 
by  fair  exegesis.  Particular  expressions  have  been 
interpreted  so  as  to  imply  some  scientific  or  historic 
error.  Thus  the  word  firmament  in  Genesis  has 
been  supposed  to  convey  the  idea  common  in  an- 
cient physical  science,  that  the  starry  universe  was 
fixed  in  a  firm,  spherical  covering  revolving  round 
the  earth.  That  idea  is  naturally  suggested  by  the 
Latin  firmamentum,  and  by  the  Greek  stereoma,  of 


106  BIBLE  DOCTRINE  OF  INSPIRATION. 

which  it  was  a  translation,  but  it  is  entirely  absent 
from  the  original  Hebrew  word  raqia^  which  means 
simply  something  spread  out  or  expanded,  an  ex- 
panse. So  the  expressions  as  to  the  sun's  rising 
(literally  breaking  fortli)  and  setting  (jcfoing  in)  are 
no  difficulty  to  the  candid  reader,  being  interpreted 
phenomenally,  just  as  are  similar  phrases  in  use 
every  day  among  ourselves. 

b.  Many  objections  rest  on  misapprehension  of 
the  facts  of  history.  Many  of  these  have  been  al- 
ready satisfactorily  cleared  up,  and  we  are  thus 
led  to  expect  the  solution  of  any  that  remain  ob- 
scure. Research  has  shown,  in  numerous  instances, 
that  it  was  the  objectors  who  were  mistaken,  and 
not  the  sacred  writers.  It  used  to  be  alleged,  for 
example,  that  Daniel  was  certainly  in  error  in 
representing  Belshazzar  as  ruler  in  Babylon,  and 
slain  when  it  was  taken  ;  whereas  profane  histo- 
rians give  the  name  of  Nabonidus  as  the  last  king, 
and  affirm  that  he  was  not  in  Babylon,  but  at  Bor- 
sippa,  where  he  surrendered  to  Cyrus,  and  was  con- 
tinued in  authority  as  a  subordinate  ruler.  The 
difficulty  seemed  formidable,  until  recent  discov- 
eries revealed  the  name  Bil-shar-uzur  on  a  brick  of 
the  period,  and  indicated  that  he  was  the  son  of  the 
reigning  monarch.  He  may  then  be  fairly  supposed 
to  have  been  joined  with  him  in  dominion,  and  left 
in  charge  of  the  city  of  Babylon.  This  explains 
what  had  formerly  been  another  puzzle,  namely, 
that,  in  promising  to  exalt  Daniel  to  the  highest 


ALLEGED  DISCREPANCIES  OR  MISTAKES.        197 

dignity,  lie  proposed  to  make  liim  third  ruler  in  the 
kingdom.     He  himself  was  only  the  second  ruler. 

In  like  manner,  Luke  was  long  charged  with 
error  as  to  Cyrenius  being  governor  of  Syria  at  the 
time  of  the  enrolment  for  taxation,  inasmuch  as 
Cyrenius  was  known  to  have  been  governor  ten 
years  later.  It  now  appears  from  the  researches  of 
Zumpt  that  he  was  twice  governor  of  Syria,  and  it 
seems  reasonable  to  suppose  that  that  earlier  period 
was  the  one  referred  to  by  Luke. 

c.  Many  of  the  objections  are  based  manifestly 
and  confessedly  upon  our  ignorance.  The  sacred 
writer  states  a  portion  of  the  facts ;  another  writer, 
sacred  or  profane,  presents  another  portion.  The 
intervening  or  connecting  links  are  not  given  by 
either,  but  have  to  be  conjectured  or  left  unsup- 
plied.  If  we  knew  more,  the  difficulty  would  be 
diminished,  or  might  disappear  altogether.  This 
is  obviously  the  case  in  all  historical  accounts.  It 
is  always  unsafe  and  unfair  to  say  that  a  thing  can- 
not be,  merely  because  we  do  not  understand  Iwiv 
it  was.  Every  juggler's  exhibition  affords  numer- 
ous instances  of  apparent  incompatibles,  where  it 
only  needs  the  knowledge  of  some  slight  unobserved 
circumstance  to  explain  the  mystery. 

The  two  accounts  of  Balaam  (Numbers  xxii.  to 
xxiv.  and  xxxi.  8-16)  are  different,  but  not  incom- 
patible, presenting  the  same  man  in  different  peri- 
ods of  his  history,  under  different  circumstances : 
at  first  a  backslider  in  heart,  but  still  clinging  with 


198  BIBLE   DOCTRINE  OF  INSPIRATION. 

one  hand  to  God,  while  grasping  with  the  otlier 
after  the  rewards  of  his  unhallowed  greed  and  am- 
bition ;  afterwards  having  thrown  off  all  restraints, 
and  doing  evil  with  both  hands  earnestly.  Why 
must  this  be  rejected,  on  purely  internal  grounds, 
as  not  "  a  trustworthy  history  of  facts"  ?  The  in- 
tervening fact,  fairly  supposable,  if  not  inferrible 
from  the  narrative,  is  that  God  deserted  the  prophet 
who,  though  he  spoke  the  truth,  loved  a  lie,  and 
left  him  to  his  miserable  and  corrupt  self. 

It  is  painfully  common  to  find  some  commenta- 
tors making  out  of  every  difference  of  view  or 
statement  a  contradiction,  when  nothing  of  the 
sort  is  fairly  implied.  Mark  and  Luke  give  the 
details  as  to  the  paralytic  let  down  before  Christ 
through  the  roof  ;  Matthew  simply  describes  his 
being  brought ;  therefore  even  Weiss  represents 
that  he  conflicts  with  Mark.  Matthew  mentions 
two  demoniacs,  Mark  only  the  more  prominent  and 
remarkable  one.  If  there  were  two,  there  was  one. 
Where  is  the  contradiction  ?  Matthew  and  Mark 
name  Thaddeus  as  one  of  the  Twelve  ;  Luke  calls 
him  Judas,  and  says  that  he  is  the  brother  of 
James,  to  distinguish  him  from  Judas  Iscariot. 
Is  this  any  discrepancy  ?  He  had  two  names,  as 
was  so  common  in  those  days.  He  was  Judas 
Thaddeus,  Judas  the  beloved.  And  Lebbeus,  which 
some  manuscripts  read,  is  probably  only  another 
endearing  epithet,  which  Jerome  says  meant  corcu- 
lum,  or  darling.  A  hundred  instances  of  this  sort 
might  be  given. 


ALLEGED  DISCREPANCIES  OR  MISTAKES.       199 

d.  Some  alleged  discrepancies  arise  from  the 
different  objects  had  in  view  by  the  different  nar- 
rators, or  from  the  different  circle  of  readers  or 
hearers  addressed.  The  four  Gospels  are  not  only 
thus  a  four-sided  view  of  our  Lord's  history  from 
as  many  different  directions,  but  are  adapted  to  as 
many  different  classes,  as  may  be  seen  in  all  recent 
comparative  studies  of  the  Evangelists.  This  is 
obvious  not  only  in  the  selection  of  the  incidents 
narrated,  and  in  the  special  details  given,  but  in 
the  arrangement  of  the  materials.  It  is  evident 
that  Matthew,  for  instance,  is  guided,  not  by  a 
chronological,  but  by  a  topical  principle  in  the 
order  he  adopts,  grouping  together  things  of  simi- 
lar nature,  or  incidents  that  naturally  suggested 
each  other.  "  That  the  Evangelist's  mind  should 
thus  have  worked  according  to  the  natural  laws  of 
suggestion,  is  altogether  compatible  with  the  in- 
spiration of  his  narrative ;  for  every  part  of  the 
Bible  bears  the  impress  of  human  thinking,  only 
preserved  by  the  Spirit  from  error  and  guided  into 
all  truth,  so  that  the  inspired  writer  says  precisely 
what  God  would  have  him  say."  (Broadus  on 
Matthew  ix.  2-34.) 

An  interesting  example  of  the  natural  and  legit- 
imate difference  in  the  narrative,  produced  by  dif- 
ferent circumstances  and  audiences,  may  be  found 
in  the  three  accounts  of  the  conversion  of  Paul, 
as  given  by  Luke,  in  tlie  course  of  his  history  (Acts 
ix.  1-18),  by  Paul  himself  tp  the  Jews  at  Jerusa- 


200  BIBLE  DOCTRINE  OF  INSPIRATION. 

lem  (Acts  xxii.  1-21),  and  again  by  Paul  to  Festus 
and  Agrippa  (Acts  xxvi.  9-23).  The  variations 
cannot  bo  urged  as  discrepancies  tliat  mark  error 
or  falsehood,  because  they  all  occur  in  the  same 
brief  book ;  and  he  would  have  been  a  heedless  and 
unskilful  falsifier  indeed  who  in  forging  a  story 
would  have  failed  to  avoid,  or  smooth  away  and 
remove,  such  obvious  grounds  of  objection.  But 
when  the  three  accounts  are  carefully  compared, 
when  the  points  omitted  at  this  time  and  inserted 
at  the  other  are  considered,  the  verisimilitude  of 
the  whole  is  decidedly  confirmed.  Compare  any 
of  the  recent  commentaries  on  Acts.  And  on  this 
general  subject,  see  Westcott's  "  Introduction  to 
the  Study  of  the  Gospels,"  Da  Costa's  "  Four  Wit- 
nesses," and  Gregory's  "  Why  Four  Gospels  ?" 

e.  Some  apparent  discrepancies  arise  from  count- 
ing years  from  different  eras  or  starting  points  ; 
from  the  use  of  round  numbers  or  approximate 
numbers ;  from  the  counting  of  parts  of  years  or 
days  as  years  or  days,  etc.  Such  methods  of  com- 
putation are  in  accordance  with  recognized  custom 
in  all  speech,  are  common,  legitimate,  necessary. 
The  laborious  arithmetical  criticism  of  Bishop  Co- 
lenso  on  the  Pentateuch,  though  expanded  over 
seven  volumes  to  manufacture  and  magnify  the 
mistakes  of  Moses,  derives  its  plausibility  mainly 
from  ignoring  these  obvious  principles. 

/.  Some  disagreements  and  difficulties  arise  ap- 
parently from  errors  in  the  transcription  of  our 


ALLEGED  DISCREPANCIES  OR  MISTAKES.        201 

present  copies,  notwithstanding  all  the  care  that 
has  been  taken,  and  the  general  accuracy  with 
which  the  sacred  books  have  been  preserved.  This 
is  probably  the  explanation  of  such  cases  as  the 
fifty  thousand  and  seventy  men  dying  at  the  small 
village  of  Bcthshemesh  (1  Samuel  vi.  19),  where 
the  fifty  thousand  are  omitted  by  Josephus,  and  by 
Thenius,  Reinke,  Wellhausen,  and  Keil  ;  and  the 
statements  of  Stephen  as  to  the  places  of  burial 
of  the  patriarchs  (Acts  vii.  16).  So  with  many  of 
the  discrepancies  between  Kings  and  Chronicles 
as  to  the  years  of  the  kings  of  Judah  and  Israel, 
and  similar  matters. 

2.     The  most  satisfactory  and  useful  method  of 
answering  this  class  of  objections,  if  we  had  time 
to  go  into  detail,  would  of  course  be  to  take  up  the 
particular  cases  of  alleged  discrepancy ;  or,  if  not 
all,  at  least  those  among  them  that  seem  strongest 
or  most  important.     Thus  we  might  subject  the 
matter  to  a  practical  test.     If  we  examine,  for  in- 
stance, the  different  accounts  as  to  the  genealogy  , 
of  our  Lord,  the  inscription  on  the  cross,  or  tlie  i 
words  spoken  at  the  baptism  of  Jesus,  it  is  readily    ( 
seen  that  these  present  no  insuperable  obstacle  to    ( 
our  accepting  the  plain  testimony  of  the  Scripture 
as  to  the  authority  of  the  inspired  writers.     Yet 
they  certainly  should  be  allowed,  as  part  of  the 
phenomena  of  Scripture,  to  aid  in  shaping  our  doc- 
trine as  to  the  nature  of  the  record  thus  inspired, 
and  to  lead  us  to  recognize  it  as  thoroughly  human 


202  BIBLE   DOCTKINE   OF  INSPIRATION. 

'  and  individual,  at  the  same  time  that  it  is  sent 
forth  with  divine  authority.  It  is  believed  that  the 
failure  to  do  this  by  some  advocates  of  inspiration, 
in  their  arguments  and  statements,  is  what  has  led 
many  devout  and  earnest  students  to  array  them- 
selves against  the  commonly  received,  but  sometimes 
unfortunately  presented,  doctrine  of  Inspiration. 

It  is  evident  that  the  testimony  of  the  Evan- 
gelists, for  instance,  should  be  compared  and  put 
together  on  the  same  legal  principles  as  the  testi- 
mony of  the  several  witnesses  before  a  court  of  jus- 
tice, each  stating  the  facts  from  his  point  of  view, 
each  modifying,  enlarging,  or  supplementing  the 
impression  derived  from  the  account  of  the  other, 
so  that  the  result  of  the  whole  testimony  is  pre- 
sented. Thus  the  celebrated  jurist.  Judge  Green- 
leaf,  has  reviewed  on  legal  grounds  the  witness  of 
the  four  Evangelists  in  his  well  known  work. 

Professor  George  P.  Fisher,  in  his  "  Beginnings 
of  Christianity"  (pp.  406-412),  has  selected  and 
briefly  discussed  five  out  of  the  whole  mass  of 
alleged  contradictions  in  the  Gospels,  as  those  most 
apparently  insuperable  on  the  ordinarily  received 
view.  These  are  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount,  as 
given  in  Matthew  and  Luke  ;  the  Healing  of  the 
Centurion's  Servant ;  Peter's  Denials ;  the  Healing 
of  the  Blind  Man  at  Jericho ;  and  the  Time  of  the 
Last  Supper,  in  John  and  the  Synoptics. 

These  particular  cases  have  been  ably  discussed 
by   President    Bartlett   in   the    Princeton   Review 


ALLEGED  DISCREPANCIES  OR  MISTAKES.        203 

for  January,  1880.  An  elaborate  and  valuable 
work  by  Rev.  J.  W.  Haley,  on  "  The  Alleged  Dis- 
crepancies of  the  Bible,"  has  been  published  by 
Draper  of  Andover.  It  gives,  in  the  First  Part,  an 
excellent  and  instructive  chapter  on  the  Origin  of 
the  Discrepancies,  and  then  treats  of  their  Design 
and  Results.  In  the  Second  Part,  he  discusses 
them  in  detail,  as  doctrinal,  ethical,  and  historical 
discrepancies.  While  in  the  numerous  and  varied 
cases  mentioned  we  may  not  always  prefer  the  ex- 
planation to  which  lie  seems  inclined,  (and  there  is 
great  room  for  difference  of  opinion  in  such  mat- 
ters,) the  work  deserves  earnest  commendation  and 
study  for  its  laborious  research,  its  condensation  of 
results,  its  candor  and  courtesy,  as  well  as  its  de- 
cided ability. 

We  cannot  now  go  into  the  details.  They  are 
discussed,  not  only  in  the  works  mentioned,  but  in 
any  good  commentary.  It  is  sufficient  here  to  say 
that  there  is  no  case  that  does  not  seem  to  us  to 
admit  of  a  reasonable  explanation,  consistent  with 
true  inspiration. 

3.  After  one  has  considered  and  explained  the 
particular  discrepancies  alleged  as  most  forcible  or 
troublesome,  we  are  sometimes  met  by  an  inquiry 
like  this :  "  I  grant  that  this  and  that  case  admits 
of  a  fair,  or  at  least  a  probable  explanation.  That 
would  not  be  sufficient  to  hinder  me  from  believing 
in  the  inspiration  of  the  Scripture.  But  suppose 
we  should  find  a  case  of  insuperable  discrepancy, 


204  BIBLE  DOCTRINE   OF  INSPIRATION. 

or  discover  by  some  Assyrian  or  Egyptian  monu- 
ment a  clear  historical  error  in  the  Bible,  what 
would  become  of  your  doctrine  of  Inspii'ation  ? " 
Our  answer  is,  We  propose  to  wait  till  such  a  case 
arises,  before  we  shape  our  doctrine,  not  from  the 
facts  and  teachings  of  God's  word,  but  to  meet  an 
imaginary  contingency  which  may  never  arise. 

And  the  fact  that  such  discrepancies  and  errors 
have  been  so  often  and  so  confidently  alleged,  and 
one  after  another  have  been  found  to  admit  of  a 
reasonable  explanation,  is  a  ground  of  confidence 
that  in  the  future  it  will  be  as  in  the  past. 

We  may  be  pardoned  for  referriug,  by  way  of 
illustration,  to  a  story  which  is  told  of  a  poor 
colored  woman,  whose  Christian  faith  was  much 
opposed  and  ridiculed  by  an  ingenious  and  free- 
thinking,  but  kind  master.  Nothing  that  he  could 
say  was  able  to  shake  her  confidence  in  God. 
Objections  melted  away  before  her  honest  and  fer- 
vent personal  experience  of  grace.  Trials  and 
afflictions  but  cleared  her  vision  for  the  things 
unseen.  "  Well,  Aunt  Sally,"  said  he,  "  I  see  that 
none  of  these  things  move  you ;  but  suppose  that 
something  was  to  happen  that  showed  you  plainly 
that  God  did  not  care  for  you  or  your  prayers, 
what  would  you  do  then?" — "Now,"  replied  she, 
"  dem  supposes^  dey  does  a  heap  o'  mischief.  I  ain't 
got  nothin'  to  do  wid  dem.  I  'm  just  livin'  by  de 
facks." 

We  shall  do  best  to  go  by  the  facts. 


CHAPTER  IV. 
OBJECTIONS  ON  MORAL  GROUNDS. 

ACTIONS  deemed  censurable,  or  laws  and  prin- 
ciples of  action  regarded  as  immoral,  are 
found  in  Scripture  :  therefore  it  is  argued  that  it 
cannot  be  inspired.  Most  of  these  points  of  objec- 
tion are  really  urged,  as  by  Tom  Paine  and  Inger- 
soll,  against  accepting  the  Scripture  as  from  God  in 
any  sense  at  all.  It  is  thought,  by  some  defenders 
of  the  Bible,  that  the  defence  is  made  easier  and 
more  impregnable  by  adopting  a  view  of  Inspira- 
tion, which  gives  up  these  to  the  assaults  of  the 
enemy,  as  only  belonging  to  the  human  element, 
for  which  the  divine  is  not  responsible.  These 
things  are  thrown  overboai'd,  as  tubs  to  the  whale, 
while  the  ship,  lightened  of  them,  pursues  its  course 
unimpeded.  A  wiser  course,  it  seems  to  us,  is  to 
meet  the  difficulties  squarely. 

1.  The  objections  on  moral  grounds  to  the  ac- 
tions narrated  may  be  classified  under  four  differ- 
ent heads.  It  may  be  doubtful,  sometimes,  to 
which  class  a  particular  transaction  should  be 
referred,  —  but  the  general  propriety  of  the  distinc- 
tion proposed  is  clear. 


206  BIBLE   DOCTRINE   OF   INSPIRATION. 

a.  Many  acts  are  recorded  without  specific  cen- 
sure that  are  certainly  not  approved.  Their  occur- 
rence in  the  narrative  gives  ho  moral  sanction  to 
them,  either  expressed  or  implied.  Every  one  con- 
cedes that  in  most  cases  this  is  so.  It  is  claimed, 
however,  that  in  certain  objectionable  acts,  such  a 
sanction  is  implied,  as  in  the  cases  of  Jephthah's 
daughter,  the  killing  of  Sisera,  and  Rahab's  false- 
hood. We  think  that  in  these  there  is  no  divine 
sanction  of  the  conduct  referred  to.  Others  prefer 
to  admit  the  commendation,  and  to  justify  the  ac- 
tions. Opinions  may  differ,  as  to  that.  Practi- 
cally, however,  the  difficulty  remains  substantially 
the  same,  whatever  view  of  Inspiration  we  adopt. 

b.  Some  of  the  actions  objected  to  are  not  really 
censurable,  when  properly  examined.  The  slaying 
of  Agag,  the  Amalekite  king,  by  Samuel  (1  Samuel 
XV.  33),  the  "  spoiling "  of  the  Egyptians  by  the 
Israelites  on  their  departure  (Exodus  xii.  35,  36), 
the  alleged  falsehood  of  Elisha  to  the  Syrian  army 
that  came  to  take  him  (2  Kings  vi.  19),  may  be 
most  probably  regarded  as  instances  of  this  sort. 
Agag  deserved  death  for  his  manifold  slaughters 
and  rapines,  and  had  been  divinely  condemned. 
Samuel  was  but  the  executioner  of  a  penalty  sanc- 
tioned at  once  by  human  and  by  divine  law  in  such 
a  case.  As  to  the  "  spoiling  of  the  Egyptians," 
there  is  no  countenance  in  the  original  to  the  idea 
of  borrowing  and  lending  unfortunately  and  erro- 
neously   suggested    by    our    common    translation. 


OBJECTIONS  ON  MORAL  GROUNDS.  207 

The  Tsraelities  ashed  (Rev.  Version),  and  the 
Egyptians  gladly  gave,  to  get  rid  of  these  terrible 
people,  whatever  they  asked.  There  is  no  implica- 
tion of  any  promise  or  obligation  to  return  the 
things  given,  no  fraud  or  deceit  in  the  case. 
Elisha's  conduct  might  be  regarded  as  among  the 
stratagems  allowable  in  war ;  but  aside  from  that, 
he  did  lead  them  to  the  man  whom  they  sought,  as 
he  said  he  would ;  and  he  dismissed  them  without 
harm. 

c.  Some  actions,  which  would  now  and  ordinarily 
be  wrong,  were  right  under  the  peculiar  circum- 
stances of  the  case,  or  were  made  right  by  specific 
divine  authority,  modifying  the  general  law.  In- 
stances of  this  kind  may  be  found  in  the  marriage 
of  brothers  and  sisters  in  the  beginning  of  the  race, 
the  extermination  of  the  Canaanites  under  Joshua, 
the  imprecations  in  the  Psalms  and  Prophets  by  in- 
spired men,  where  God's  retributive  interposition 
is  denounced  or  implored  against  foul  and  per- 
secuting cruelty. 

d.  There  are  numerous  cases  where,  though  the 
general  character  or  conduct  of  persons  is  ap- 
proved, no  sanction  is  given  to  the  various  errors 
or  the  crimes  into  which  they  fell.  It  is  sufficient 
to  mention,  without  further  comment,  the  cases  of 
Noah,  Abraham,  Jacob,  David,  Peter.  They  were 
good  men,  —  but,  as  all  others  on  earth,  imperfect 
good  men. 

2.  Besides  specific  actions  like  these,  in  regard 


208  BIBLE  DOCTRINE  OF  INSPIRATION. 

to  which  the  principles  of  explanation  are  clear, 
whatever  differences  of  opinion  may  exist  as  to  the 
particular  view  to  be  taken  in  each  case,  there  arc 
more  general  moral  objections  on  the  ground  that 
morally  faulty  conceptions,  enactments,  or  institu- 
tions are  inwrought  into  the  Scripture  ;  that,  in 
certain  of  the  writings  (those  of  Solomon  es- 
pecially) a  low  moral  tone  prevails,  not  religious 
but  purely  selfish,  prudential,  and  worldly ;  and 
that  in  others  such  fierce,  bloody,  and  cruel  ideas 
are  sanctioned,  or  positively  inculcated,  as  are  in- 
consistent with  divine  authorship. 

Special  objection  is  made  to  the  Old  Testament 
teachings  with  reference  to  polygamy,  divorce, 
war,  and  slavery,  and  to  such  laws  as  that  of  strict 
retaliation  upon  a  malicious  false  swearer,  death 
for  the  idolater  or  seducer  to  idolatry,  etc. 

As  to  the  law  of  retaliation,  like  for  like,  it  is 
sufficient  to  say  that  it  is  difficult  to  sec  how  a 
fairer  retribution  could  be  assigned,  or  one  more 
likely  to  deter  from  such  a  crime,  than  that  a  ma- 
licious perjurer,  who  expected  by  his  false  swearing 
to  injure  another,  should  have  exactly  that  same 
suffering  inflicted  upon  him  that  he  thought  to 
bring  on  the  other.  A  rigid  law  strictly  enforced 
is  mercy  to  the  innocent,  however  hard  upon  the 
guilty;  and  is  far  more  beneficial  to  those  who 
might  otherwise  have  been  criminals,  by  deterring 
them  from  crime,  than  impunity  in  wrong-doing 
would  be. 


OBJECTIONS  ON  MORAL  GROUNDS.  209 

In  reference  to  the  punishment  for  idolatry,  it  is 
to  be  remembered  that  the  Jewish  state  was  a  the- 
ocracy ;  and  that,  in  a  government  where  God  was 
the  King,  promoting  idolatry  was  high  treason,  and 
fitly  to  be  punished  by  the  highest  penalty  known 
to  the  law. 

As  to  polygamy,  easy  divorce,  slavery,  and  war, 
they  all  existed  in  the  state  of  society  into  whicli 
the  earliest  revelations  came.  They  were  modified, 
controlled,  and  have  been  greatly  ameliorated  by 
the  progressive  influence  of  the  Mosaic  and  the 
Christian  systems.  They  have  not  yet  been  en- 
tirely abolished.  The  complaint  against  the  Bible 
is,  that  it  did  not  instantaneously  and  at  the  outset 
annihilate  evils,  already  intrenched  in  such  strong- 
holds of  human  passion  and  interest  and  habit  as 
even  the  boasted  Nineteenth  Century  cannot  utterly 
demolish.  If  it  be  said  that  any  partial  correction 
of  evil  is  compromise  and  connivance,  —  that  every- 
thing proceeding  from  God  must  be  absolutely  per- 
fect, and  that  everything  temporary,  transitional, 
preparatory,  must  be  ascribed  to  the  fallible  human 
instruments,  and  not  to  the  divine  Designer  who 
used  them,  —  we  reply  that  we  do  not  concede  these 
points.  God  does  make  millions  of  incomplete, 
imperfect  things,  of  all  shades  and  degrees  approxi- 
mating perfection  ;  He  does  correct  evils  progres- 
sively and  gradually  ;  and  it  is  His  wisdom,  and 
not  the  folly  or  mistake  of  the  instrument  em- 
ployed, which  secures  the  adaptation  of  the  succes- 

14 


210  BIBLE  DOCTRINE  OF  INSPIRATION. 

sive  phases  and  stages  of  Revelation  to  the  needs 
of  mankind.  The  skill  of  an  architect  may  be 
expended  as  well  upon  the  temporary  scaffolding 
as  the  permanent  structure,  and  may  be  seen  as 
truly  in  the  rough  foundation  as  in  the  polished 
column  or  carved  ornaments. 

The  relative  imperfection  of  parts  of  a  progres- 
sive system  may  be  an  element  of  that  real  per- 
fection which  consists  in  its  adaptation  as  a  whole 
to  the  people  and  the  circumstances  for  which  it 
was  designed,  and  to  the  object  which  it  was  to 
accomplish.  Taking  men  as  they  were,  sunk  and 
degraded  in  ignorance  and  vice,  it  was  necessary 
for  their  deliverance  that  God  should  stoop  to  their 
need  ;  should  construct  a  ladder,  the  lowest  rounds 
of  whrch  should  not  be  too  far  above  the  Slough  of 
Despond  in  which  they  were  sinking ;  should  send 
down  a  law  that  would  reach  them,  and  lift  them 
up,  where  they  were.  Would  it  have  been  more 
divine  had  it  stopped  short  of  them,  in  order  that 
it  might  conform  to  some  abstract  conception  which 
we  may  imagine  of  perfection  ?     Certainly  not. 

The  success  of  the  divine  moral  government  as  a 
unity,  and  yet  a  progressive  unity,  was  dependent 
on  such  a  use  of  gradual  steps  and  processes.  As 
Dr.  Ladd  has  well  said,  —  "  Imperfect  human  ways 
of  thinking  and  speaking,  and  ethically  low  and 
imperfect  customs,  institutions  and  laws  may  be 
taken  up  into,  and  more  or  less  changed  and  assim- 
ilated by,  the  forces  of  revelation  and  inspiration. 


OBJECTIONS   ON  MORAL  GROUNDS.  211 

Such  must  the  historical  process,  indeed,  be,  if  God 
is  to  get  his  moral  and  religious  ideas  realized  in 
human  life.  ...  It  resembles  all  the  methods  of 
the  divine  government,  to  take  man  in  hand  for 
legal  discipline  in  the  condition  in  which  he  is 
found,  and  to  deal  with  him  by  starting  from  this 
condition."    (Doctrine  of  Sacred  Scripture,  I.  476.) 

But  if  we  thus  recognize  "  these  concrete  divine 
words  and  definite  commands  as  the  forms  into 
which  the  divine  ideas  cause  the  crude  material  to 
crystallize  "  ;  if  the  fact  "  that  the  ideas  take  these 
forms  is,  indeed,"  as  Dr.  Ladd  says,  "  a  proof  of 
their  divine  origin  and  nature";  if  in  this  adapt- 
edness  to  man's  case  consists  their  perfection  for 
their  purpose,  and  If  this  relative  imperfection  was 
really  necessary  to  its  end,  and  wisely,  mercifully, 
lovingly,  adapted  to  that  end,  —  why  must  we  ascribe 
that  peculiarity  to  the  fallible  man  rather  than  to 
the  all-wise  God  ?  Why  attribute  this  exact  suit- 
ableness in  the  instrument  for  its  end  to  the  instru- 
ment itself,  and  account  it  a  token  of  fallibility, 
rather  than  to  Ilim  who  both  made  and  chose  and 
used  the  instrument,  and  shows  His  wisdom 
thereby  ? 

The  imperfection,  then,  in  these  laws  and  insti- 
tutions, we  admit ;  the  immorality  we  deny.  And 
if  the  Mosaic  law  not  only  recognizes  its  own  pre- 
paratory and  partial  and  incomplete  nature,  but 
points  to  and  provides  for  its  own  completion  in 
the  subsequent  stages  of  revelation,  this  seems  to 


212  BIBLE  DOCTRINE  OF  INSPIRATION. 

US  far  from  indicating  an  origin  inferior  to  the 
mind  of  Him  who  saw  the  end  from  the  beginning, 
and  had  it  in  view  in  the  very  first  steps  of  his 
divine  self-revealing. 

We  may  be  permitted  to  quote  and  adopt,  on  this 
subject,  the  forcible  words  of  Rev.  Dr.  Frederic 
Gardner,  of  the  Berkeley  Divinity  School,  Con- 
necticut. 

"  Eevelation  was  progressive,  because  only  iu  that 
way  was  it  possible  that  man  could  receive  it.  i^o- 
where  is  it  possible  for  him  to  attain,  or  even  to  com- 
prehend, perfect  truth  at  a  bound.  He  is  obliged  to 
gain  first  one  elementary  fact  or  principle,  and  then 
by  means  of  this  to  advance  to  another,  which  must 
often  seriously  modify  his  conception  of  the  first.  In 
the  study  of  language,  he  must  master  the  rule  before 
he  can  learn  the  exception.  The  Ptolemaic  system  in 
astronomy  was  the  necessary  means  of  systematizing 
observations  until  they  should  lead  to  the  Copernican ; 
the  Copernican  must  begin  by  the  assumption  of  cir- 
cular orbits  and  uniform  motions  of  the  planets,  until 
these  could  lead  to  the  discovery  of  elliptical  orbits 
and  the  doctrine  of  the  radius  vector.  Still  our  pres- 
ent knowledge  is  imperfect.  The  law  of  gravity  and 
the  observed  facts  of  astronomy  are  not  in  perfect  ac- 
cord. Each  new  discovery,  as  of  the  asteroids  and  of 
Neptune,  brings  about  a  closer  harmony  ;  but  we  can- 
not expect  to  see  in  nature  a  perfect  realization  of  the 
law  until  we  can  look  out  upon  its  completeness  from 
tlie  footstool  of  the  throne  of  the  Omniscient.  The 
same  thing  is  true  of  chemistry  and  of  all  other  natural 


OBJECTIONS  ON  MORAL  GROUNDS.  213 

sciences,  and  indeed  of  all  human  knowledge.  As 
already  said,  the  elements,  the  most  essential  points, 
must  be  thoroughly  fixed  in  the  mind  before  it  can  re- 
ceive their  modifications.  Were  the  process  reversed, 
and  the  fuller  truth  set  at  once  before  the  untrained 
thought,  the  result  could  only  be  disastrous,  and  posi- 
tive misconceptions  take  the  place  of  simple  imperfect 
apprehension.  The  child  now,  as  well  as  the  race  in 
its  childhood,  must  learn  the  unity  of  God,  before  it 
can  be  profitably,  or  even  safely,  taught  the  doctrine 
of  the  Trinity.  Any  other  course  will  be  sure  to  lead 
to  the  error  of  Tritheism."  —  Gardiner's  Old  and  New 
Testament  hi  their  Mutual  Relations,  p.  49. 

Substantially  the  ideas  above  suggested  apply  to 
the  other  allegations  against  the  morality  of  the 
Bible.  We  must  be  allowed,  however,  before  pass- 
ing from  the  subject,  to  protest  against  the  charge 
that  certain  of  the  Proverbs  "  show  so  much  of 
shrewdness  as  scarcely  to  escape  the  charge  of 
being  immoral,  when  considered  from  the  Chris- 
tian point  of  view  (see  Proverbs  xvii.  8,  xviii.  16, 
xxi.  14)."  These  are  simply  statements  of  what 
is  a  fact  of  common  observation  and  experience, 
that  gifts  are  both  used  effectively  and  abused ; 
they  do  not  give  any  commendation  or  advice  of 
bribery.  Also  we  fail  to  discover  any  "  asceticism  " 
in  Paul's  judicious  suggestions  to  the  Corinthians 
(1  Corinthians  vii.).  They  seem  to  us  quite  suit- 
able, as  he  said,  "  by  reason  of  the  present  dis- 
tress,"  and  not  at  all  out  of   harmony  with  the 


214  BIBLE   DOCTRINE   OF  INSPIRATION. 

cheerful  views  of  God  and  man,  of  human  life  and 
enjoyment,  in  his  discourse  at  Lystra  (Acts  xiv. 
17),  or  his  charge  to  the  rich(l  Timothy  vi.  17). 

That  the  record  of  religious  experiences,  of  the 
conflicts  of  minds  grappling  with  the  great  prob- 
lems of  life  and  of  thought,  is  not  unfit  for  a  reve- 
lation designed  for  the  instruction  of  those  who  are 
called  to  similar  experiences  and  conflicts,  is  ap- 
parent enough.  There  is  no  more  effective  way  of 
teaching  the  ignorant,  guiding  the  perplexed,  and 
comforting  the  despondent  or  tempted,  than  by 
such  examples.  Yet  the  use  of  this  very  method 
in  Psalms  like  the  sixth  has  been  regarded  as  an 
exhibition  of  "  moral  feebleness  amounting  almost 
to  cowardice,"  and  in  the  seventy-third  as  a  "  com- 
plaint against  the  divine  dealing,"  regardless  of 
the  triumphant  issue  of  these  conflicts  of  soul  indi- 
cated in  Psalms  vi.  9  and  Ixxiii.  17-26.  Dr.  Ladd, 
though  censuring  these  passages,  says  very  forcibly 
and  justly  in  another  place  :  — 

"  In  these  cases  [of  religious  experiences]  we  surely 
can  find  no  fault  either  with  the  contents  of  the  writ- 
ing, or  with  the  moral  consciousness  of  the  author,  for 
furnishing  to  us  an  accurate  and  sympathetic  picture 
of  facts.  Even  the  saints,  both  of  ancient  and  of 
modern  times,  do  often  doubt  the  word  of  the  Lord, 
waver  in  their  judgment  of  his  justice  and  mercy,  and 
wander  in  the  dark  places  of  rebellion  and  despair. 
The  story  and  the  picture  of  these  experiences  may 
well  form  a  part  of   the  ethico-religious  contents  of 


OBJECTIONS  ON  MORAL  GROUNDS.  215 

Sacred  Scripture ;  for  the  use  of  the  story  and  the 
picture  have,  in  all  subsequent  times,  been  both  ethi- 
cally and  religiously  purifying.  And  when  the  nar- 
rator of  the  experience,  or  the  painter  of  the  picture, 
comes  at  last  into  the  confidence  of  trust  and  into 
clearness  of  moral  vision,  we  may  well  believe  that 
the  Spirit  of  all  truth  and  light  has  been  with  him  all 
the  way.  We  may  well  assign  the  record  of  such 
moral  and  religious  experiences  to  a  notable  position 
jimong  the  revealed  ethico-religious  truths  of  the 
Bible.  Such  remarks  as  the  foregoing  are  more  or 
less  applicable  to  the  books  of  Job  and  Ecclesiastes, 
to  many  of  the  Psalms,  to  numerous  portions  of  the 
prophetic  and  historical  writings,  and  to  certain  pas- 
sages of  the  New  Testament."  —  Ladd,  I.  466. 

We  need  scarcely  add  anything  to  these  truthful 
and  appropriate  suggestions. 

Our  reply  so  far  has  been  limited  to  discussing, 
first,  the  particular  actions  complained  of  as  im- 
moral, and,  secondly,  the  general  objections  to  the 
ethical  teachings  of  the  Bible.  It  is  time  that  we 
turn  to  a  larger  view,  and  contemplate  those  teach- 
ings, not  in  fragments  or  scraps,  but  as  a  whole. 

3.  The  moral  grandeur  of  the  ethics  of  the 
Bible,  whether  taken  singly  as  a  system,  or  com- 
pared with  any  other  system  that  has  ever  been 
presented  to  man,  bespeaks  its  divine  origin.  In 
the  search  for  flaws  on  the  beautiful  vase,  men 
may  fail  to  observe  its  matchless  symmetry,  its 
richly  variegated  hues,  and  the  skilful  blending  of 


216  BIBLE   DOCTRINE   OF  INSPIRATION. 

tints.  In  looking  for  spots  in  the  sun,  one  may  be 
blind  to  the  magnificence  of  that  glorious  orb  itself. 
And  thus  we  may  be  so  absorbed  in  finding,  or  even 
in  refuting,  paltry  objections  against  the  ethics  of 
the  Bible,  as  to  fail  to  take  those  impressive  and 
affecting  views  that  we  should  of  its  sublime  moral 
teachings. 

It  remains  a  fact,  that  after  all  the  highest  ex- 
ertions of  the  human  mind  on  moral  questions,  and 
all  the  wildest  vagaries  of  invention  and  combi- 
nation, no  moral  teaching  has  ever  been  devised 
which  has  so  ennobled  man,  so  purified  life,  so 
liberated  captives  and  overthrown  tyranny,  so  lifted 
up  the  degraded  and  invigorated  the  weak,  so 
comforted  the  bereaved  and  animated  the  despair- 
ing. During  an  age  when  comparatively  enlight- 
ened and  cultivated  nations  were  still  groping  in 
darkness  on  moral  questions,  the  Hebrews  received, 
and  have  transmitted  to  all  succeeding  ages,  a  code 
of  ethics  that  still  furnishes  the  foundation  for  all 
ethical  teaching  for  mankind.  There  is  such  sim- 
plicity, such  grandeur,  such  regal  breadth  of  control, 
such  divine  adaptation  to  the  human  heart,  in  the 
Decalogue  and  the  subsequent  precepts  based  upon 
it,  as  to  cast  utterly  into  the  shade  all  the  injunc- 
tions and  advices  that  have  come  from  heathen 
sources,  and  make  them  seem  entirely  puerile  and 
empty.  Every  renewal  or  acceleration  of  moral 
life  in  the  world,  every  quickening  of  worn-out 
nationalities,  or  amelioration  of  savage  tribes,  may 


OBJECTIONS  ON  MORAL  GROUNDS.  217 

be  traced  directly  to  the  influence  of  the  Bible  ;  and 
the  decadence  which  has  occurred,  in  numerous 
distressing  cases,  in  Christendom  itself,  is  no  less 
distinctly  connected  with  the  neglect  of  the  Word, 
with  departure  from  its  plain  precepts,  and  with 
holding  it  back  systematically  from  the  people. 

By  their  fruits  ye  shall  know  them.  "  The  in- 
fallible test  of  all  religious  teaching,"  says  L. 
Abbott,  "  is  its"  practical  result  in  the  lives  of  those 
tliat  receive  it.  The  answer  to  modern  eulogists  of 
Buddhism  and  Confucianism  is  India  and  China." 
The  most  terrible  and  overwhelming  refutation  of 
Atheism  is  France  in  the  Revolution.  The  most 
invincible  argument  against  the  substitution  of  the 
Church  of  Rome  for  the  authority  of  God's  Word 
is  sullen,  stagnant,  sinking  Spain.  And  the  effect 
of  even  the  partial  introduction  of  the  Scriptures  is 
to  be  seen  in  the  awakening  of  Italy,  and  the  dawn 
of  a  brighter  day  for  that  priest-ridden  land. 


CHAPTER  y. 

OBJECTIONS   OX   CRITICAL   GROUNDS. 

T  TNDER  this  head  are  classed  sundry  objections 
^-'^  arising  out  of  the  alleged  discoveries  and  con- 
clusions of  Modern  Criticism  as  to  the  origin  and 
authorship  of  certain  books  of  the  Bible,  and  as  to 
their  transmission  to  the  present  time. 

The  word  Criticism  has  received  several  different 
significations.  Primarily  a  critic  means  a  judge, 
from  krino  ;  and  one  who  examined  anything  care- 
fully, so  as  to  judge  of  its  character  or  its  mean- 
ing, was  called  a  critic.  So  Criticism  was  used  in 
a  very  wide  sense,  including  interpretation  or  ex- 
position. At  present,  in  reference  to  the  Bible, 
Criticism  is  commonly  limited  to  various  subsidiary 
topics  wliich  precede  and  prepare  for  interpreta- 
tion ;  and  in  this  sense  it  is  customary  to  distin- 
guish between  Text  Criticism  and  Higher  Criticism. 
The  former  signifies  the  discussion  as  to  the  agree- 
ment of  the  present  form  of  the  sacred  text  with 
the  originals  as  they  proceeded  from  their  respect- 
ive authors.  The  latter  embraces  all  inquiries, 
especially  from  internal  evidence,  as  to  the  author- 
sliip  of  the  writings,  their  age,  circumstances  of 


OBJECTIONS  ON  CRITICAL  GROUNDS.         219 

composition,  object,  etc.,  thus  covering  a  consider- 
able part  of  the  subject  of  investigation  usually 
considered  in  what  is  termed  Special  Introduction. 

Of  course  it  is  beyond  our  scope  here  to  take  up 
all  the  objections  that  might  arise  in  connection 
with  Criticism  in  its  widest  application.  We  shall 
endeavor  to  discuss  briefly  those  which  are  based 
on  Text  Criticism  and  Higher  Criticism. 

1.  It  is  objected,  that,  with  all  the  researches  of 
Text  Criticism,  it  is  not  possible  in  all  cases  to  be 
certain  what  was  the  original  text.  Hence  it  is 
alleged,  that,  even  if  the  original  was  infallible,  our 
present  text  is  not ;  that  plenary  inspiration,  were 
it  granted,  would  be  useless  and  unmeaning,  if  the 
writings  were  not  preserved  miraculously  and  abso- 
lutely (as  they  evidently  have  not  been)  from  the 
accidents  of  time  and  of  careless  copying;  and 
that  it  is  not  probable  that  God  would  supernat- 
urally  confer  complete  accuracy  and  authority,  if 
the  documents  were  then  to  be  left  to  the  usual 
possibilities  of  error  in  transmission  to  future  ages. 
To  these  objections  we  reply  :  — 

a.  The  facts  present  a  valid  argument  against 
the  unfounded  claim  that  was  once  made,  that 
every  letter,  syllable,  and  even  every  vowel-point 
and  accent  of  our  present  received  copies  of  the 
Bible,  must  be  regarded  as  inspired.  But  they  do 
not  affect  our  doctrine,  for  we  make  no  such  claim. 
The  inspiration  of  the  original  Scriptures  is  what 
we  affirm ;  and  this  is  an  entirely  different  question 


220  BIBLE   DOCTRINE   OF   INSPIRATION. 

from  the  accuracy  with  which  copies  of  them  have 
been  preserved.  It  is  now  well  known  that  the 
Hebrew  vowel-points  are  of  later  origin  than  the 
Christian  era  (probably  about  the  fifth  or  sixth  cen- 
tury), and  can  only  be  regarded  as  representing  the 
carefully  preserved,  but  not  authoritative,  tradition 
as  to  the  pronunciation,  while  the  consonants  alone 
form  the  ancient  text.^  Also  it  is  thoroughly  un- 
derstood that  the  manuscripts  both  of  the  Old  and 
the  New  Testament  have  been  subject  to  the  defects 
necessarily  incident  to  the  most  careful  copying. 
What  we  affirm  is,  that  the  Sacred  Scriptures,  as 
they  came  from  their  respective  authors,  had  the 
characteristics  of  accuracy  and  authority,  as  mes- 
sages from  God. 

I.  The  Scriptures,  though  subject  to  the  neces- 
sary perils  of  transcription,  were  specially  protected, 
not  only  by  a  general  providential  guardianship, 
which  it  is  fair  to  assume  and  which  history  con- 
firms, but  by  several  favoring  circumstances  of  no 
small  importance.  Among  these  are — the  reverence 
with  which  from  the  beginning  they  were  regarded, 
occasioning  more  frequent  copying  than  in  the  case 
of  any  other  book  in  the  world,  and  more  careful 

1  Dr.  Ladd  affirms:  "We  may  say  in  brief  of  the  Masoretic 
text,  punctuation  as  well  as  consonants,  as  does  Wellhausen,  '  As  a 
type  of  speech,  the  punctuation  is  for  ns  unalterable  ;  as  a  com- 
mentary, inasmuch  as  it  reproduces  that  construction  of  the  sense 
of  a  given  passage  which  has  prevailed  since  the  Christian  era,  it  is, 
although  not  unchangeable,  still  at  least  incomparably  the  most 
valuable  help  to  the  understanding.'  "  —  Ladd,  L  697. 


OBJECTIONS   ON  CRITICAL   GROUNDS.         221 

and  affectionate  effort  to  be  accurate ;  the  number 
of  manuscripts,  which  naturally  increases  the  num- 
ber of  various  readings  to  be  noted,  but  also  greatly 
increases  the  opportunity  of  detecting  errors,  and 
arriving  with  much  confidence  at  the  original  text ; 
the  publicity  of  these  documents  by  their  being 
read  repeatedly  and  reverently  in  worship,  which 
also  tended  to  insure  the  discovery  and  correction 
of  errors ;  the  numerous  translations,  early  and 
late,  which  called  attention  to  the  minutiae  of  their 
language  and  expression ;  the  habit  of  delivering 
discourses  based  on  them,  and  of  making  extensive 
quotations  from  them,  in  speaking  and  writing  ;  the 
elaborate  expositions  and  commentaries,  the  har- 
monies and  comparisons  of  parallel  passages,  and 
even  the  searches,  friendly  or  hostile,  after  discre- 
pancies and  difficulties,  beginning  at  an  early  period, 
and  kept  up  with  unwearied  perseverance  and  mi- 
croscopic minuteness  ;  the  wide  diffusion  of  copies 
in  different  lands,  and  often  in  the  hostile  custody 
of  warring  sects,  prompt  to  detect  and  eager  to 
expose  any  falsification  or  corruption.  All  these 
circumstances  have  tended  to  secure  in  a  very  high 
degree  substantial  accuracy  and  purity  in  the  trans- 
mission of  copies  of  the  sacred  writings. 

e.  The  limits  of  error,  within  which  we  are 
practically  sure  of  our  ground,  may  be  very  confi- 
dently fixed,  and  leave  little  opportunity  of  mistake 
as  to  the  teaching  of  Scripture  in  regard  to  any 
fact,  or  doctrine,  or  precept.     This  is  especially  true 


222  BIBLE  DOCTRINE  OF  INSPIRATION. 

of  those  parts  of  the  Bible  on  which  faith  and  duty 
chiefly  rest.  If  there  are  "  textual  uncertainties," 
as  we  frankly  admit,  there  are  also  textual  certain- 
ties ;  and  these  are  ample  enough  for  guidance 
through  the  snares  of  earth  and  to  the  glories  of 
heaven.i 

On  this  subject  the  emphatic  testimony  of  "West- 
cott   and    Hort,   the    most    recent,   and    certainly 

1  The  only  two  passages  in  the  New  Testament,  of  any  consid- 
erable length,  where  the  genuineness  of  the  text  may  be  disputed, 
are  Mark  xvi.  9-20,  and  John  vii.  53  to  viii.  11.  The  latter,  prob- 
ably, ought  to  be  abandoned  ;  the  former,  we  think,  should  be  re- 
tained. Scholars  have  ample  opportunities  of  information  on  the 
subject  in  the  works  of  Scrivener,  Alford,  Tregelles,  Tischendorf, 
and  Westcott  and  Hort.  Even  those  slightly  familiar  with  the 
topic  may  find  enough  to  satisfy  their  doubts  in  the  candid  and 
accurate  statements  of  Schaff  in  his  "Companion  to  the  New 
Testament."  A  fair  but  simple  test  would  be  to  take  some  single 
Epistle,  e,  g.  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  or  that  to  the  Galatians, 
and  ascertain  the  number  and  the  importance  of  the  various  read- 
ings found  in  these  important  documents,  and  the  changes  in  the 
commonly  received  text  which  would  be  made  by  the  general  con- 
sent of  modern  text  critics  of  the  highest  rank.  It  is  stated  by 
Gaussen,  that  the  changes  made  by  Griesbach  that  affect  the  sense 
would  be  only  as  follows  :  — 

Galatians  iv.  17,  for  "exclude  us,"  read  "exclude  you." 
Galatians  iv.  26,  for  "  mother  of  us  all,"  read  "mother  of  us." 
Galatians  v.  19,  for  "adultery,  fornication,"  read  "fornication." 
Romans  vi.  16,  for  "  whether  of  sin  unto  death  or  of  obedience 
unto  righteousness,"  read  "whether  of  sin  or  of  righteousness." 

Romans  vii.  6,  for  "that  being  dead  wherein  we  were  held," 
read  "having  died  to  that  wherein  we  were  held." 
Romans  xi.  6,  omit  the  latter  half  of  the  verse. 
Romans  xii.   11,   for  "serving  the  Lord,"  read  "serving  the 
occasion." 

Romans -xvi.  5,  for  "the  first  fruits  of  Achaia,"  read  "the  first 
fruits  of  Asia." 


OBJECTIONS   ON   CRITICAL  GROUNDS.         223 

among  the  most  competent  of  text  critics,  is' ade- 
quate, without  further  discussion.     They  say  :  — 

"  With  regard  to  the  great  bulk  of  the  words  of  the 
New  Testament,  as  of  most  other  ancient  writings, 
there  is  no  variation  or  otlier  ground  of  doubt,  and 
therefore  no  room  for  textual  criticism ;  and  here 
therefore  an  editor  is  merely  a  transcriber.  The  same 
may  be  said  with  substantial  truth  respecting  those 
various  readings  which  have  never  been  received,  and 
in  all  probability  never  will  be  received,  into  any 
printed  text.  The  proportion  of  words  virtually  ac- 
cepted on  all  hands  as  raised  above  doubt  is  very 
great,  not  less,  on  a  rough  computation,  than  seven 
eighths  of  the  whole.  The  remaining  eighth,  there- 
fore, formed  in  great  part  by  changes  of  order  and  other 
comparative  trivialities,  constitutes  the  whole  area  of 
criticism.  If  the  principles  followed  in  the  present 
edition  are  sound,  this  area  may  be  very  greatly  re- 
duced. Eecognizing  to  the  full  the  duty  of  abstinence 
from  peremptory  decision  in  cases  where  the  evidence 
leaves  the  judgment  in  suspense  between  two  or  more 
readings,  we  find  that,  setting  aside  differences  of 
orthography,  the  words  in  our  opinion  still  subject  to 
doubt  only  make  up  about  one  sixtieth  of  the  whole 
New  Testament.  In  this  second  estimate  the  propor- 
tion of  comparatively  trivial  variations  is  beyond 
measure  larger  than  in  the  former ;  so  that  the  amount' 
of  what  can  in  any  sense  be  called  substantial  varia- 
tion is  but  a  small  fraction  of  the  whole  residuary 
variation,  and  can  hardly  form  more  than  a  thou- 
sandth  part  of  the  entire  text."  —  The  New  Testament 
in  Greek,  II.  2. 


224  BIBLE   DOCTRINE   OF  INSPIRATION. 

With  this  weighty  testimony  agree  the  well- 
chosen  words  of  Dr.  Philip  Schaff,  the  chairman 
of  the  American  Committee  of  the  Revisers. 

*'  This  multitude  of  various  readings  of  the  Greek 
text  need  not  puzzle  or  alarm  any  Christian.  It  is 
the  natural  result  of  the  great  wealth  of  our  docu- 
mentary resources  ;  it  is  a  testimony  to  the  immense 
importance  of  the  New  Testament ;  it  does  not  affect, 
but  it  rather  insures,  the  integrity  of  the  text;  and  it 
is  a  useful  stimulus  to  study. 

"  Only  about  400  of  the  100,000  or  150,000  varia- 
tions materially  affect  the  sense.  Of  these,  again, 
not  more  than  about  fifty  are  really  important  for 
some  reason  or  other ;  and  even  of  these  fifty  not  one 
affects  an  article  of  faith  or  a  precept  of  duty  which 
is  not  abundantly  sustained  by  other  and  undoubted 
passages,  or  by  the  whole  tenor  of  Scripture  teaching. 
The  Textus  Receptns  of  Stephens,  Beza,  and  Elzevir, 
and  of  our  English  Version,  teach  precisely  the  same 
Christianity  as  the  uncial  text  of  the  Sinaitic  and 
Vatican  manuscripts,  the  oldest  versions,  and  the 
Anglo-American  Revision."  —  Comjicin'ion  to  the  Neic 
Testament,  p.  177. 

Richard  Bentley,  the  ablest  and  boldest  of  the 
earlier  classical  critics  of  England,  affirmed  that 
even  the  worst  of  manuscripts  docs  not  pervert  or 
set  aside  "  one  article  of  faith  or  moral  precept." 

Dr.  Ezra  Abbot,  of  Harvard,  who  ranked  among 
the  first  textual  critics,  and  was  not  hampered  by 
orthodox  bias  (being  a  Unitarian),  asserted  that 


OBJECTIONS  ON  CRITICAL  GROUNDS.         225 

"  no  Christian  doctrine  or  duty  rests  on  those  por- 
tions of  the  text  which  are  affected  by  differences 
in  the  manuscripts ;  still  less  is  anything  essential 
in  Christianity  touched  by  the  various  readings. 
They  do,  to  be  sure,  affect  the  bearing  of  a  few 
passages  on  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity ;  but  the 
truth  or  falsity  of  the  doctrine  by  no  means  de- 
pends upon  the  reading  of  those  passages."  The 
same  scholar  spoke  on  the  subject  more  fully,  with 
special  reference  to  the  English  Revision  :  — 

"This  host  of  various  readings  may  startle  one 
who  is  not  acquainted  with  the  subject,  and  he  may 
imagine  that  the  whole  text  of  the  New  Testament  is 
thus  rendered  uncertain.  But  a  careful  analysis  will 
show  that  nineteen  twentieths  of  these  are  of  no  more 
consequence  than  the  palpable  errata  in  the  first 
proof  of  a  modern  printer  ;  they  have  so  little  author- 
ity, or  are  so  manifestly  false,  that  they  may  be  at 
once  dismissed  from  consideration.  Of  those  Avhich 
remain,  probably  nine  tenths  are  of  no  importance  as 
regards  the  sense;  the  differences  either  cannot  be 
represented  in  a  translation,  or  affect  the  form  of 
expression  merely,  not  the  essential  meaning  of  the 
sentence.  Though  the  corrections  made  by  the  revis- 
ers in  the  Greek  text  of  the  New  Testament  followed 
by  our  translators  probably  exceed  two  thousand, 
hardly  one  tenth  of  them,  perhaps  not  one  twentieth, 
will  be  noticed  by  the  ordinary  reader.  Of  the  small 
residue,  many  are  indeed  of  sufficient  interest  and 
importance  to  constitute  one  of  the  strongest  reasons 
for  making  a  new   revision,  which  should  no  longer 

15 


226  BIBLE  DOCTRINE  OF  INSPIRATION. 

suffer  the  known  errors  of  copyists  to  take  the  place 
of  the  words  of  the  evangelists  and  apostles.  But 
the  chief  value  of  the  work  accomplished  by  the  self- 
denying  scholars  who  have  spent  so  much  time  and 
labor  in  the  search  for  manuscripts,  and  in  their  col- 
lation or  publication,  does  not  consist,  after  all,  in  the 
corrections  of  the  text  which  have  resulted  from  the 
researches.  These  corrections  may  affect  a  few  of 
the  passages  which  have  been  relied  on  for  the  sup- 
port of  certain  doctrines,  but  not  to  such  an  extent 
as  essentially  to  alter  the  state  of  the  argument. 
Still  less  is  any  question  of  Christian  duty  touched 
by  the  multitude  of  various  readings.  The  greatest 
service  which  the  scholars  who  have  devoted  them- 
selves to  critical  studies  and  the  collection  of  critical 
materials  have  rendered  has  been  the  establishment 
of  the  fact  that,  on  the  whole,  the  Kew  Testament 
writings  have  come  down  to  us  in  a  text  remarkably 
free  from  important  corruptions,  even  in  the  late  and 
inferior  manuscripts  on  which  the  so-called  '  received 
text '  was  founded ;  while  the  helps  which  we  now 
possess  for  restoring  it  to  its  primitive  purity  far 
exceed  those  which  we  enjoy  in  the  case  of  any  emi- 
nent classical  author  whose  works  have  come  down  to 
us.  The  multitude  of  'various  readings,'  which  to 
the  thoughtless  or  ignorant  seem  so  alarming,  is  sim- 
ply the  result  of  the  extraordinary  richness  and  vari- 
ety of  our  critical  resources."  —  Sunday  School  Times, 
May  28,  1881. 

d.  It  is  not  true  that  plenary  inspiration  of  the 
original  would  be  useless,  unless  the  copies  were 


OBJECTIONS  ON  CRITICAL  GROUNDS.         227 

secured  by  a  perpetual  miracle  against  the  effects 
of  time  and  of  careless  and  corrupt  transmission. 
A  truly  divine  original,  even  if  copied  with  no  more 
than  ordinary  human  care  and  fidelity,  is  vastly 
superior  to  an  original,  however  accurately  pre- 
served, that  never  had  divine  authority.  And 
obviously  the  fact  that  it  was  recognized  and  ac- 
cepted as  from  God  would  serve  greatly  to  insure 
its  being  preserved  with  more  than  ordinary  care. 

e.  Neither  can  it  be  justly  said  that  there  is  no 
probability  that  God  would  supernaturally  inspire 
the  writings,  unless  he  also  miraculously  preserved 
them  from  erroneous  transcription.  He  might  do 
the  one,  which  he  alone  could  do,  and  leave  the 
other,  as  in  so  many  other  matters,  to  the  faitliful- 
ness  of  his  servants  intrusted  with  that  responsi- 
bility. We  know  that  the  oral  teaching  of  our 
Lord  Jesus  not  reported  by  our  Evangelists  was 
directly  and  thoroughly  the  voice  of  God.  We 
believe  that  the  oral  and  unrecorded  instructions  of 
the  Apostles  in  their  official  work  were  inspired. 
Yet  there  is  no  reason  to  affirm  any  miracle  of 
preservation  for  either.  The  voice  of  God  in  these 
forms  was  limited,  except  indirectly,  to  the  audience 
or  the  generation  that  heard  it.  The  accidents  and 
corruptions  of  oral  transmission  did  not  render 
either  impossible,  or  improbable,  or  unmeaning, 
or  useless,  the  divine  authority  with  which  they 
spake.  Why  should  the  similar  but  smaller  perils 
of  written  transmission  render  it  incredible  that 


228  BIBLE   DOCTRINE   OF  INSPIRATION. 

God  should  inspire,  in  the  fullest  sense,  the  records 
of  his  grace  ? 

2.  The  objections  on  critical  grounds  that  are 
most  urgently  and  confidently  pressed  against  the 
doctrine  of  Inspiration  are  those  arising  from  what 
is  called  the  Higher  Criticism. 

This  is  a  region  of  thought  and  inquiry  almost 
entirely  modern,  in  which  much  is  still  vague,  and 
dependent  largely  on  subjective  impressions  and 
presuppositions,  rather  than  ascertained  facts,  but 
where  positive  assertion  is  often  furnished  with 
surprising  liberality  in  the  absence  of  definite  in- 
formation. The  remark  of  Professor  Ladd  on  tliis 
subject  is  eminently  just,  as  pointing  out  the  weak- 
nesses of  both  the  older  and  the  newer  Criticism. 

"That  the  former  dogmatic  manner  of  regarding 
these  critical  questions,  while  it  claimed  to  weigh 
carefully  the  purely  external  and  historical  sources 
for  its  affirmations,  was  in  reality  largely  subjective  in 
the  worst  sense  of  the  word,  there  can  be  no  dispute. 
But  there  ought  to  be  just  as  little  dispute,  that  much 
of  the  more  modern  criticism,  Avhether  it  please  to 
call  itself  external  or  internal,  or  neither,  is  just  as 
largely  subjective,  in  quite  as  bad  a  sense  of  the  word. 
The  difference  between  the  older  so-called  critics 
and  many  of  the  more  modern  ones  consists  largely  in 
this  :  the  former  had  a  childish  trust  in  imtrustworthy 
traditions,  while  the  latter  have  a  conceited  confidence 
in  the  vagaries  of  their  own  minds."  —  Doctrine  of  Sa- 
cred Scripture,  I.  491. 


OBJECTIONS  ON  CRITICAL  GROUNDS.         229 

We  have  no  need  nor  disposition  to  undervalue 
either  the  legitimate  method  or  the  fairly  estab- 
lished results  of  modern  critical  research.  Much 
may  be  learned,  much  has  been  learned,  by  the 
patient,  elaborate  comparisons  on  which  it  pro- 
ceeds ;  and  a  true  "  Higher  Criticism  "  may  be  just 
as  valuable  as  a  false  or  misguided  attempt  at  it 
may  be  dangerous  and  delusive. 

It  is  impossible,  of  course,  to  give  here  a,  full  dis- 
cussion of  many,  or  in  fact  of  any,  of  the  questions 
arising  on  this  topic ;  our  aim  is  only  to  present 
such  general  considerations  as  may  show  how  far 
those  questions  apply  to  our  present  subject. 

a.  It  is  highly  important  to  distinguish  between 
Criticism  and  the  critics.  We  are  often  assured 
vehemently  that  "the  verdict  of  Criticism"  is  thus 
and  so  ;  when  perhaps  it  is  only  the  sentiment  of  a 
few  critics,  possibly,  when  sifted,  of  a  single  man  of 
eminence,  re-echoed  and  repeated  by  several  other 
persons.     Doctors  disagree,  and  so  do  critics. 

b.  Some  critical  theories  of  large  extent  and  pre- 
tension are  based  on  cool  assumptions  of  what  is 
utterly  devoid  of  proof.  For  instance,  the  views  of 
Graf  and  Kuenen  are  avowedly  based  on  the  denial 
of  anything  really  supernatural,  the  ignoring  of  any 
actual  miracle  or  prophecy.  Whatever  appears  to 
be  such  must  be  either  ingeniously  explained  away, 
or  set  aside  contemptuously  as  unhistorical,  the 
polite  modern  term  for  false.  The  Leyden  school 
of  theologians  have  attempted  to  do  for  the  Old 


230  BIBLE  DOCTRINE  OF  INSPIRATION, 

Testament  what  the  Tiibingen  school  with  equal 
confidence  proposed  to  do  for  the  New,  that  is,  to 
revise  the  history  of  divine  manifestation  with  the 
divine  omitted,  like  the  play  of  Hamlet  with  Hamlet 
left  out.  In  our  judgment  both  have  failed  :  their 
verdict  is  that  of  certain  critics,  but  not  at  all  that 
of  Criticism.  The  presuppositions  on  which  they 
are  based  are  emphatically  denied. 

c.  A  large  part  of  the  questions  discussed  by 
the  Higher  Criticism,  whichever  way  they  may  be 
decided,  have  nothing  to  do  with  the  doctrine  of 
Inspiration,  or  with  the  acceptance  of  the  books 
concerned  as  a  part  of  the  sacred  Word.  There 
are  a  number  of  the  Biblical  books,  such  as  Kings 
and  Chronicles,  concerning  the  authorship  and 
period  of  which  the  Bible  itself  gives  no  distinct 
indication  ;  and  whether  they  are  concluded  to  be 
by  one  author  or  by  several,  whether  earlier  or 
later,  can  have  no  decisive  bearing  on  our  investi- 
gations. 

d.  As  to  some  of  the  critical  questions  most  dis- 
cussed, it  is  apparent  that  they  bear  rather  on  the 
Canon  of  Scripture  than  on  the  Inspiration  of  Scrip- 
ture. It  is  fair  to  say  that,  if  the  results  of  careful 
inquiry  should  make  it  necessary  to  reject  or  sur- 
render certain  books  as  not  a  genuine  part  of  the 
Word  of  God,  it  would  only  deprive  us  of  those 
books  themselves,  not  cast  any  doubt  or  obscurity 
over  the  value  and  authority  of  the  remainder. 
Thus,  if,   as   the   result  of    candid  investigation, 


OBJECTIONS  ON  CRITICAL  GROUNDS.         231 

Second  Peter  or  Jude  must  be  given  up,  if  Esther 
or  Canticles  cannot  be  vindicated  as  entitled  to  a 
place  in  the  sacred  volume,  the  evidence  for  the 
inspiration  of  the  other  books,  and  their  utility  for 
every  Christian  man,  would  not  be  thereby  in  the 
least  weakened.  And  the  question  of  the  extent  of 
the  Canon  must  always  be  carefully  distinguished 
from  the  other  question,  which  is  the  one  im- 
mediately under  consideration,  viz.  what  authority 
belongs  to  the  books  that  are  recognized  as  inspired 
or  canonical. 

e.  There  are  books  in  regard  to  which  serious 
doubts  are  urged  as  to  authorship,  but  no  conse- 
quences materially  affecting  their  inspiration  would 
follow,  if  the  decision  should  be  adverse  to  the 
.common  opinion.  Thus,  if  Ecclesiastes  be  by  some 
later  author  personating  Solomon,  or  the  second 
part  of  Isaiah  (chapters  xl.  to  Ixvi.)  be  by  a  later 
Isaiah  than  the  well-known  prophet  of  Hezekiah's 
day  ;  or,  if  the  letter  to  the  Hebrews  should  be  ad- 
judged not  to  be  by  the  Apostle  Paul,  it  would  not 
be  necessary  to  relinquish  the  inspiration  or  the 
canonical  authority  of  these  writings.  We  do  not 
accept  the  alleged  proof  against  the  genuineness  of 
either  of  these  writings  according  to  the  received 
view  of  their  authorship.  But  if  we  did,  it  would 
not  destroy  their  value  or  their  divinity  for  us. 

/.  There  are  other  books,  however,  on  which  an 
adverse  decision  as  to  authorship  would  have  a 
wider  range,  and  consequences  more  disastrous  upon 


232  BIBLE   DOCTRINE   OF  INSPIRATION. 

the  whole  system  of  revealed  truth,  as  commonly 
understood  and  received.  Professor  Ladd  does 
not  hesitate  to  say,  that  "  we  should  regard  the 
Pentateuch  differently,  if  we  could  consider  it  as 
coming  in  its  present  form  from  the  speech  or  pen 
of  the  great  inspired  lawgiver,  Moses "  (I.  497) ; 
and  "  there  can  be  no  doubt,  that,  in  the  narrow 
and  more  technical  sense  of  the  word,  we  should 
pronounce  the  Pentateuch  '  inspired,'  as  we  cannot 
now,  if  we  could  show  that  it  was  written  by 
Moses"  (I.  676).  On  the  other  hand,  he  declares 
that  "  complete  critical  proof  of  the  spuriousness 
of  the  Fourth  Gospel  would  profoundly  change  our 
conception  of  Sacred  Scripture,  and  would  not 
leave  untouched  our  conception  of  Christianity  it- 
self"  (I.  577).  He  as  earnestly  denies  that  Moses 
wrote  the  Pentateuch,  as  he  affirms  that  John  wrote 
the  Gospel ;  and  frankly  recognizes  the  logical  con- 
sequences of  the  decision  in  both  cases. 

The  Mosaic  authorship  of  the  body  of  the  Penta- 
teuch (aside  from  the  addition  to  Deuteronomy 
which  records  his  death,  and  possibly  a  few  brief 
notes,  geographical  or  historical,  which  may  have 
been  inserted  by  some  later  hand)  seems  to  us  of 
profound  importance.  It  is  so  thoroughly  assumed 
and  recognized  elsewhere  in  Scripture,  that  to  deny 
it  leads  naturally,  we  think,  to  a  denial  of  the 
reality  of  Old  Testament  history,  and  to  a  sub- 
versal  of  the  whole  sclieme  and  system  of  divine 
revelation.     If  the  Pentateuch,  as  we  are  told  by 


OBJECTIONS   ON   CRITICAL  GROUNDS.         233 

some,  is  "  not  a  work,  but  a  growth,"  of  exceed- 
ingly composite  authorship  and  mainly  post-exilian 
origin ;  if  it  is  a  compound  of  Babylonish  legends 
and  pious  frauds,  whether  gotten  up  for  selfish  in- 
terest, or  class  aggrandizement,  or  with  broader 
and  more  patriotic  purpose  ;  if  it  not  only  gives 
indications,  as  we  think  it  does,  of  diverse  sources 
traditional  or  documentary,  employed  under  divine 
direction  by  Moses  himself,  but  also  contains,  as 
we  think  it  does  not,  contradictions  and  marks  of 
falsehood  ;  if  Moses  himself  is,  as  some  contend, 
a  mythical  personage,  and  the  Exodus  never  actu- 
ally occurred  as  described  ;  —  we  can  scarcely  vin- 
dicate the  verity  of  the  subsequent  history,  or 
the  allusions  of  Jesus  and  the  Apostles  to  these 
writings. 

So,  if  the  genuineness  of  Daniel  is  successfully 
assailed,  and  it  must  be  dragged  down  from  the 
position  of  a  trup  history  and  prophecy  to  be  a 
legend  of  the  era  of  the  Maccabees,  —  a  vaticinium 
post  eventum,  a  fiction  designed  to  inspire  the  patri- 
otic ardor  of  the  Jewish  rebels  against  Antiochus 
Epiphanes,  —  we  cannot,  it  seems  to  us,  logically 
stop  short  with  that ;  but  must  either  exscind  it 
from  tlie  Canon,  in  spite  of  its  recognition  by  Jews 
and  Christians  and  by  our  Lord  himself,  or  else 
maintain  such  moral  enormities  as  an  honest  lie,  a 
fraud  of  divine  origin. 

In  like  manner,  the  authorship  of  the  Fourth 
Gospel  by  the  Apostle  John  seems  to  us  not  only 


234  BIBLE  DOCTRIXK  OF  INSPIRATION. 

to  have  been  triumphantly  vindicated  from  the  in- 
genious and  vehement  assaults  it  has  encountered, 
but  to  be  vital  to  the  system  of  Christianity,  as  a 
divinely  inspired  whole.  This  Gospel  is,  as  Dr. 
E.  H.  Sears  has  well  styled  it,  "  the  Heart  of 
Jesus  Christ."  ^ 

1  It  is  ^vith  pleasure  tliat  we  refer  to  the  able  vindication  of 
this  autliorsliip  hy  Doctor  Ladd  (I.  550-572),  and  to  the  more  am- 
ple and  elaborate  discussions  of  Bishop  Lightfoot  and  of  Doctor 
Ezra  Abbot. 


CHAPTER    VI. 
OBJECTIONS  ON  SCIENTIFIC   GROUNDS. 

THE  progress  of  the  physical  sciences  in  late 
years,  and  especially  in  the  present  century, 
lias  been  indeed  marvellous,  has  opened  up  new- 
avenues  for  industry  and  new  fields  for  thought. 
If  the  "  oppositions  of  science  falsely  so  called  " 
(1  Timothy  vi.  20)  were  a  dangerous  snare  to  young 
preachers  of  the  early  Church,  the  peril  of  them 
has  not  passed  away,  but  is  renewed  and  increased 
with  all  the  wider  research,  the  rapid  advance  of 
discovery,  and  the  daring  freedom  of  investigation 
characteristic  of  these  later  generations.  The 
Christian  soldier  of  to-day  needs  to  acquaint  him- 
self with  all  the  lines  of  assault  adopted  by  the 
enemy,  and  to  arm  himself  at  all  points.  Especially 
should  he  familiarize  himself  earnestly  with  those 
methods  of  attack  which  seem  most  in  accordance 
with  the  spirit  of  the  age,  wdiich  are  most  fortified 
by  appeals  to  the  modes  of  argument  and  inquiry 
that  have  yielded  such  admirable  results,  and  that 
claim  to  be  associated  with  the  advance  of  truth 
and  light  and  free  investigation.  These  are  noble 
w^ords,  —  Truth  and  Light  and  Freedom  :  they  are 


236  BIBLE   DOCTRINE   OF  INSPIRATION. 

watchwords  of  progress.  And  the  ideas  they  repre- 
sent are  justly  dear  to  tlie  hearts  of  all  men,  and 
not  less  dear  to  us,  as  lovers  of  the  Bible,  which 
has  so  greatly  promoted  that  advance. 

It  is  not  our  purpose  to  consider  in  detail  the 
various  points  of  alleged  discrepancy  between  the 
Bible  and  modern  physical  science.  This  is 
the  business  of  full  and  elaborate  treatises  on 
Science  and  the  Bible.  All  that  is  practicable  for 
us  here  is  to  state  some  general  principles  as  to 
the  relation  between  God's  two  revelations,  in  his 
Works  and  in  his  Word. 

A.     All  Truth  is  consistent  ■with  all  other  Truth. 

The  human  mind  is  so  constituted  as  to  desire 
to  perceive  this  consistency,  in  order  to  produce 
and  maintain  conviction.  No  system  of  belief  can 
command  intelligent  confidence,  unless  we  have  the 
conviction  that  it  is  in  harmony  with  whatever  else 
we  know.  We  do  not  afifirm  that  we  shall  always  be 
able  to  see  the  points  of  contact  between  truths, 
each  of  which  is  satisfactorily  proved  by  its  own  in- 
dependent line  of  argument.  The  meeting  place  of 
the  two  may  be  out  beyond  the  sphere  of  our  vision. 
But  all  truth,  rightly  understood,  is  harmonious. 

There  are  truths,  tlie  full  connection  of  which 
with  each  other,  or  with  other  truth  that  we  know, 
may  not  be  clearly  seen,  yet  concerning  which  we 
do  not  doubt.  Such  are  the  existence  of  evil  com- 
pared with  the  divine  attributes  of  goodness  and 


OBJECTIONS  ON  SCIENTIFIC  GROUNDS.       237 

omnipotence  ;  the  divine  efficiency  considered  in 
connection  with  human  freedom  and  responsibility  ; 
the  Trinity,  three  persons  in  one  God,  and  similar 
doctrines.  But  these  do  not  at  all  invalidate  the 
general  principle  that  all  truth  is  consistent  with 
all  other  truth.  A  thing  cannot  be  true  in  theology 
and  false  in  fact,  or  reliable  in  science  but  wrong 
in  practice,  any  more  than  it  can  be  both  true  and 
false  at  the  same  time, —  or  than  black  can  be 
white. 

B.     The  Bible  does  not  profess  to  teach  Physical 
Science. 

That  does  not  come  w-ithin  the  scope  and  object 
of  Scripture.  Its  grand  design  was  the  manifesta- 
tion of  God  in  his  revelation  to  Man.  In  revealing 
this  it  touches,  at  numerous  points,  human  history 
and  affairs.  All  that  can  be  expected  of  the  Bible 
is,  that,  when  it  makes  allusions  to  matters  outside 
of  its  special  topic,  the  statements  shall  be  correct 
so  far  as  they  go.  Omissions  of  things  historical 
or  scientific,  however  important  and  interesting 
these  things  might  be  to  the  general  scholar,  may 
naturally  be  expected  ;  they  are  unavoidable,  in  ac- 
cordance with  the  })lan  on  which  the  Scripture  was 
given.  So  far  from  being  fairly  objectionable,  they 
form  a  part  of  the  fitness  of  the  Bible  to  its  end,  as 
could  readily  be  shown. 

It  was  never  objected  to  Euclid's  work  on 
Mathematics,  that  it  did  not  contain  an  account  of 


238  BIBLE  DOCTRINE  OF  INSPIRA^TION. 

the  dramatic  performances  of  that  age  ;  or  that  it 
was  defective  because  it  gave  no  sketch  of  Physics 
or  Metaphysics,  as  expounded  by  Aristotle.  It 
would  be  equally  futile  to  object  to  the  Scriptures 
that  they  fail  to  give  an  account  of  the  science  of 
that  day,  whether  correct  or  incorrect.  They  do 
not  profess  to  teach  that  thing  ;  they  were  not  in- 
tended to  do  it ;  there  was  no  need  that  they 
should,  in  carrying  out  their  grand  and  spiritual 
design.  It  would  have  been  a  palpable  turning 
aside  from  the  great  theme  of  revelation,  and  un- 
suited  to  the  end  in  view ;  i.  e.  to  meet  the  moral 
necessities  of  man,  and  restore  him  from  the  ruins 
of  the  Fall. 

C.     Our  Interpretations  of  Scripture  are  not  Scripture. 

Though  they  may  seem  to  us  quite  obvious, 
though  they  may  be  hallowed  by  long  traditional 
belief,  or  sanctioned  by  the  judgment  of  many  of 
the  good  and  great,  our  interpretations  of  Scripture 
may  be  erroneous.  We  may  have  mistaken  its 
meaning.  If  apparent  discrepancy  arises,  either 
with  other  Scripture  or  with  facts  otherwise  made 
known,  let  us  re-examine,  and  see  what  the  pas- 
sages really  mean.  Let  us  compare  Scripture  with 
Scripture,  and  find  out  the  total  aggregate  result 
of  such  comparison,  for  one  text  is  often  limited  or 
interpreted  by  another.  This  passage,  if  considered 
alone,  might  seem  to  assert  a  particular  idea ;  but, 
by  comparing  it  with  others,  it  is  seen  that  that 


OBJECTIONS   ON  SCIENTIFIC  GROUNDS.       239 

would  be  a  misinterpretation.  Another  passage 
may  have  been  erroneously  translated,  and  the  ap- 
parent inference  will  be  at  once  set  aside  on  con- 
sidering the  real  meaning  of  the  original.  Or  facts 
of  nature  or  of  secular  history  may  have  come  to 
light,  which  help  to  fill  up  the  deficiencies  of  our 
apprehension,  which  point  to  new  and  better  inter- 
pretations of  misunderstood  or  obscure  texts.  The 
true  Biblical  scholar  will  welcome  light  from  what- 
ever source,  old  or  new,  hostile  or  friendly.  His 
reverence  for  God  and  for  his  truth  will  bind  him, 
instead  of  repelling,  to  accept  whatever  is  fairly 
proved.  Only  let  us  be  sure  that  it  is  proved^  and 
not  merely  asserted. 

D.     In  like  manner,  Scientific  Conclusions   and   Opin- 
ions are  not  always  correct. 

We  must  wait  for  Science  to  have  reached  a  set- 
tled conclusion  before  any  legitimate  argument,  or 
any  well-grounded  objection  to  the  Bible,  can  be 
fairly  deduced  from  it.  How  opposite  to  this,  and 
how  inconsistent  with  candor  and  common  sense 
the  course  usually  pursued  by  opponents  of  revela- 
tion, we  need  scarcely  pause  to  describe.  As  soon 
as  any  idea  has  been  started  by  some  scientific  man 
which  seems  to  conflict  with  the  received  views  of 
Christians,  —  an  idea  thrown  out,  perhaps,  as  a 
mere  conjecture,  or  a  theory,  novel,  peculiar  to 
himself,  and  as  yet  untested, — some  are  ready  to 
exclaim,  and  to  trumpet  it  in  all  the  newspapers, 


240  BIBLE   DOCTRINE   OF  INSPIRATION. 

"  Ah,  Moses  was  mistaken  !  The  Bible  is  in  error. 
The  learned  Professor  So-and-so  has  just  discovered 
it.  There  can  be  no  mistake  about  it  this  time. 
Science  never  lies." 

True  :  science  never  lies.  And  so,  figures  never 
lie;  but  they  often  deceive,  they  are  often  n)isin- 
terpreted  and  misapplied.  They  tell  no  untrue 
story,  but  we  take  from  them  an  untrue  meaning. 
Our  inference,  our  understanding,  our  observation 
of  the  facts,  or  our  induction  from  the  facts,  may 
have  been  fallacious. 

In  this,  as  in  other  topics,  we  must  draw  the  dis- 
tinction between  science  and  scientists,  as  we  have 
to  draw  it  between  theology  and  theologians.  Cer- 
tain critics  say  so  and  so ;  therefore  that  is  the 
verdict,  we  are  told,  of  criticism,  of  3Iodern  Criti- 
cism, of  Advanced  Criticism  !  Therefore  it  is  un- 
questionable. Some  geologist,  or  biologist,  says 
thus ;  therefore  Geology  or  Biology  testifies  to  that 
conclusion.     Pei'haps  not  I 

Much  of  what  has  been  called  the  conflict  of  sci- 
ence with  religion  was  really  the  conflict  of  science 
with  science,  the  overthrow  of  one  false  opinion 
after  another,  which  Bible  readers  as  well  as  others 
of  their  day  had  adopted,  not  from  the  Bible,  but 
from  their  predecessors  or  contemporaries. 

As  long  as  human  knowledge  continues  to  be 
progressive,  such  experiences  may  be  repeatedly 
expected. 


OBJECTIONS  ON  SCIENTIFIC  GROUNDS.       241 

E.  The  Language  of  Scripture  in  describing  Physical 
Facts  is  the  Language  of  Common  Life,  the  Lan- 
guage of  Appearances. 

The  Bible  describes  phenomena,  not  the  essence 
or  abstract  nature  of  things.  We  cannot  see  how 
it  could  well  do  otherwise.  If  it  used  any  other 
language  than  that  of  common  life,  it  would  be  mis- 
understood, or  not  be  understood  at  all,  by  plain 
people,  and  would  fail  to  accomplish  the  purpose 
for  which  it  was  given.  And  as  we  do  not  look  for 
what  is  called  scientific  precision  in  the  colloquial 
use  of  every-day  terms,  so  we  need  not  be  surprised 
to  find  the  same  sort  of  terms  used  in  the  Bible. 
No  one  counts  you  an  ignoramus,  or  charges  you 
with  a  blunder,  because  you  speak  of  the  sun's  ris- 
ing and  setting,  as  if  that  necessarily  implied  your 
belief  that  the  sun  is  higher,  i.  e.  more  remote  from 
the  centre  of  the  earth,  at  one  time  of  day  than  at 
another,  or  as  if  it  indicated  your  ignorance  of  the 
revolution  of  the  earth  on  its  axis.  You  are  using, 
as  every  sensible  man  does  on  such  subjects,  whether 
philosopher  or  not,  phenomenal  expressions. 

The  language  of  science  itself  is  also,  for  tlie 
most  part,  the  language  of  appearances.  Very 
often  also  it  contains  etymologically  some  implica- 
tion, which  originally  represented  a  crude,  tempo- 
rary, erroneous  phase  of  scientific  opinion.  What 
are  oxygen  and  hydrogen,  electricity,  magnetism, 
galvanism,  rays,  reflection,  refraction,   focus,   and 

16 


242  BIBLE  DOCTRINE  OF  INSPIRATION. 

the  like,  —  in  fact,  almost  all  the  familiar  terms  of 
science,  —  hut  words  that  wrap  up  in  them  allu- 
sions to  ancient  theories,  some  of  them  exploded, 
or  references  to  men  and  ideas  of  a  past  age  ? 

May  I  not  speak  of  rays  of  light,  without  heing 
chargeable  with  ignorance  that  the  undulatory  the- 
ory of  light  is  now  generally  preferred  to  the  cor- 
puscular? Must  I  necessarily  be  understood  to 
allude  to  amber  whenever  I  use  the  term  electricity, 
because  the  word  elektron  means  amber  ? 

Had  the  Scriptures  used  the  language  of  modern 
science,  itself  subject  to  perpetual  modifications 
and  even  revolutionary  transitions,  with  reference 
to  the  common  physical  phenomena  incidentally 
mentioned,  they  would  have  been  unintelligible  to 
those  to  whom  they  were  at  first  given,  and  no 
more  instructive  to  us  of  modern  times.  There 
was  no  alternative,  then.  It  would  have  been 
necessary,  if  that  idea  was  carried  out,  to  occupy 
the  pages  of  revelation  with  merely  scientific  state- 
ments and  explanations  of  physical  facts,  and  so 
to  make  it  a  book  of  scientific  rather  than  religious 
teaching ;  in  which  case  it  would  either  have  been 
so  brief  and  fragmentary  as  to  be  utterly  unsatis- 
factory, incomplete,  and  obscure,  or  else  so  huge  a 
volume  as  to  be  practically  inaccessible ;  and  even 
then  it  would  have  been  obscure,  because  the  world 
was  not  prepared  for  it. 

The  plan  adopted  was  the  obvious,  the  practical, 
the  only  reasonable  plan.     It  was  to  use  the  Ian- 


OBJECTIONS  ON   SCIENTIFIC  GROUNDS.       243 

guage  of  the  appearances  of  things  and  of  common 
life,  —  not  as  indorsing  any  errors  which  may  be 
supposed  to  be  involved  in  the  etymology  of  the 
words,  but  simply  to  become  intelligible.  In  speak- 
ing to  men,  the  terms  which  men  used  and  under- 
stood at  the  time  must  be  employed. 

Had  the  other  course  been  adopted,  it  is  easy  to 
see,  not  only  that  the  book  must  have  been  ex- 
tremely burdensome  in  bulk,  but  that  its  communi- 
cations would  have  been  as  sure  to  meet  with 
opposition  at  one  period  from  being  ahead  of  the 
age,  unintelligible  and  preposterous  to  their  minds, 
as  at  another  from  being  behind  the  age. 

Its  scientific  communications,  if  it  undertook  to 
teach  science,  must  have  been  complete,  anticipat- 
ing even  those  brilliant  and  now  unimagined  dis- 
coveries which  await  the  zeal  of  future  explorers 
of  the  twentieth,  or  perhaps  the  thirtieth  century, 
when  the  science  and  the  scientific  phrases  of  to-day 
may  be  as  much  the  jest  and  scorn  of  the  learned 
world  as  medieeval  ideas  on  such  subjects  are  now. 
The  student  who  graduated  from  college  even  forty 
years  ago  would  find  himself  to-day  bewildered 
and  utterly  at  a  loss,  in  reading  the  text-books  or 
attempting  to  use  the  apparatus  of  instruction  in 
Chemistry,  if  he  had  not  diligently  kept  up  with  tlie 
progress  of  research  and  the  changes  of  technical 
nomenclature. 

God  does  not  reveal  either  scientific '  or  moral 
truth  in  the  way  tiiat  the  objectors  demand;  not 


244  BIBLE  DOCTRINE  OF  INSPIRATION. 

all  at  one  time,  and  especially  not  all  the  first  time. 
He  gives  scope  and  need  for  the  exercise  of  our 
own  powers  of  research.  He  gives  us  faculties, 
and  expects  that  we  shall  use  them. 

There  was  sound  philosophy  in  the  answer  of  the 
little  five-year-old  girl,  when  some  one  teased  her 
about  curling  her  hair,  instead  of  leaving  it  to  her 
Maker.  She  replied,  "  When  I  was  little,  he  curled 
it  for  me ;  but  now  he  thinks  I  am  old  enough  to 
curl  it  myself."  God  leaves  us  something  to  do,  in 
searching  into  his  works  and  his  word. 

Bearing  these  ideas  in  mind,  it  will  not  be  diffi- 
cult to  apply  fair  principles  of  interpretation  to 
both  records,  that  of  Science  and  that  of  Revela- 
tion. Both  volumes  were  written  by  Almighty 
direction.  The  latter  was  recorded  and  unfolded 
by  degrees,  during  centuries  of  human  progress, 
but  now  lies  before  us  complete  and  full.  The 
other  began  to  be  recoi'ded  far  earlier,  but  is  even 
as  yet  only  partially  unfolded  and  read  by  us.  God 
permits  human  hands  to  open  and  reveal  it  to  our 
view,  under  the  guidance  of  his  providence.  Some 
of  the  pages  have  been  turned,  and  earnest  minds 
are  at  work  deciphering  their  meaning.  More  re- 
main to  be  brought  to  light,  and  read  in  the  pro- 
gress of  science.  How  many,  we  cannot  tell,  and 
what  is  in  them  we  cannot  imagine. 

As  we  advance  in  the  process  of  investigating 
and  comparing  tlie  teachings  of  these  two  records, 
these  two  divine  volumes,  God's  Word  and  God's 


OBJECTIONS  ON  SCIENTIFIC  GROUNDS.       245 

Works,  it  may  well  be  that  seeming  contradictions 
will  arise.  But  as  leaf  after  leaf  is  turned  and 
offered  to  our  perusal,  as  fact  after  fact  falls  into 
place  in  the  great  system  of  inductive  truth,  we 
find  fresh  instruction  arising,  and  may  be  sure  that 
ultimately,  when  both  are  correctly  understood,  the 
two  records  will  thoroughly  agree. 

This  has  been  actually  the  experience  of  devout 
and  patient  students  of  both  records,  in  age  after 
age.  There  has  been  no  period,  perhaps,  in  which 
some  apparent  contrarieties  have  not  been  either 
discovered  or  imagined.  But  each  generation  has 
seen  some  difficulties  solved,  and  new  ones  arising, 
to  be  soon  relieved  by  further  investigation. 

P.     The  Number  of  Remarkable   Agreements  between 
Science  and  Scripture  is  very  great. 

It  is  far  more  difficult  for  these  unexpected  coin- 
cidences to  be  explained,  on  the  principles  of  the  un- 
believer, than  for  any  of  the  apparent  contradictions 
to  be  cleared  up,  which  are  so  boastfully  alleged.  It 
would  be  easy  to  point  out  a  number  of  these  in  de- 
tail, and  to  show  how  Science,  in  each  of  her  depart- 
ments, is  casting  light  on  Revelation.  At  present 
it  may  suffice  to  give  a  single  example  taken  from 
an  able  article  by  Dr.  McCosh,  President  of  Prince- 
ton College. 

"  The  correspondence  between  Genesis  and  Geology 
as  to  the  order  of  creation  has  been  expounded  scien- 
tifically by  the  three  men  on  this  continent  most  com- 


246  BIBLE   DOCTRINE   OF  INSPIRATION. 

pctont  to  speak  on  the  subject;  viz.  Professor  Dana  of 
Yale,  Dr.  Dawson  of  McGill  University,  Montreal,  and 
])r.  Guyot  of  Princeton.  ...  I  doubt  much  whether 
any  geologist  in  the  present  day  could,  in  so  brief 
a  compass,  give  as  accurate  a  compendium  of  the 
changes  which  our  earth  has  undergone  as  is  in  these 
thirty-one  verses  in  the  opening  of  our  Bible.  Except 
on  the  supposition  that  the  Scriptural  statement  is 
inspired,  it  is  impossible  to  account  for  its  being 
"written  and  published  three  thousand  years  before 
Science  made  its  discoveries." — Homiletic  Monthli/, 
January,  1884,  p.  234. 

The  same  point  is  presented  by  the  Hon.  Wil- 
liam E.  Gladstone,  in  his  memorable  discussion 
with  Mr.  Huxley  in  the  "  Nineteenth  Century,"  in 
1886.    We  quote  simply  a  few  sentences :  — 

"I  do  not  suppose  it  would  be  feasible,  even  for 
Professor  Huxley,  taking  the  nebular  hypothesis  and 
geological  discovery  for  his  guides,  to  give,  in  the 
compass  of  the  first  twenty-seven  verses  of  Genesis, 
an  account  of  the  cosmogony,  and  of  the  succession 
of  life  in  the  stratification  of  the  earth,  which  would 
combine  scientific  precision  of  statement  with  the 
majesty,  the  simplicity,  the  intelligibility,  and  the 
impressiveness  of  the  record  before  us.  Let  me  mod- 
estly call  it,  for  argument's  sake,  an  approximation  to 
the  present  presumptions  and  conclusions  of  science. 
Let  me  assume  that  the  statement  in  the  text  as  to 
plants,  and  the  statement  of  verses  24  and  25,  as  to 
reptiles,  cannot  in  all  points  be  sustained;  and  yet 
still  there  remain  great,  unshaken  facts  to  be  weighed. 


OBJECTIONS   ON  SCIENTIFIC  GROUNDS.       247 

First,  the  fact  that  such  a  record  should  have  been 
made  at  all.  Secondly,  the  fact  that,  instead  of  dwell- 
ing in  generalities,  it  has  placed  itself  under  the 
severe  conditions  of  a  chronological  order,  reaching 
from  the  first  nisus  of  chaotic  matter  to  a  consummated 
production  of  a  fair  and  goodly,  a  furnished  and  a 
peopled  world.  Thirdly,  the  fact  that  its  cosmogony 
seems,  in  the  light  of  the  nineteenth  century,  to  draw 
more  and  more  of  countenance  from  the  best  natural 
philosophy ;  and.  Fourthly,  that  it  has  described  the 
successive  origins  of  the  five  great  categories  of  pres- 
ent life  with  which  human  experience  was  and  is 
conversant  in  that  order  which  geological  authority 
confirms.  How  came  these  things  to  be  ?  How  came 
they  to  be,  not  among  Accadians,  or  Assyrians,  or 
Egyptians,  who  monopolized  the  stores  of  human 
knowledge  when  this  wonderful  tradition  was  born ; 
but  among  the  obscure  records  of  a  people  who,  dwell- 
ing in  Palestine  for  twelve  hundred  years  from  their 
sojourn  in  the  valley  of  the  Nile,  hardly  had  force  to 
stamp  even  so  much  as  their  name  upon  the  history 
of  the  world  at  large,  and  only  then  began  to  be  ad- 
mitted to  the  general  communion  of  mankind  when 
their  Scriptures  assumed  the  dress  which  a  Gentile 
tongue  was  needed  to  supply  ?  It  is  more  rational, 
I  contend,  to  say  that  these  astonishing  anticipations 
were  a  God-given  supply,  than  to  suppose  that  a  race^ 
who  fell  uniformly  and  entirely  short  of  the  great  in- 
tellectual development  of  antiquity,  should  here  not 
only  have  equalled  and  outstripped  it,  but  have  en- 
tirely transcended,  in  kind  even  more  than  in  degree, 
all  known  exercises  of  human  faculties."  —  Nineteenth 
Century,  January,  1886,  p.  16. 


248  BIBLE   DOCTRINE   OF  INSPIRATION. 

G.   The   Absence   of  definitely   established   Contradic- 
tions so  far  is  a  remarkable  Phenomenon. 

Many  have  been  alleged,  and  some  insisted  on 
with  great  zeal  and  positiveness.  All  the  dogma- 
tism and  boldness  of  assertion  has  certainly  not 
been  confined  to  the  theologians.  But,  when  closely 
considered,  many  of  the  contradictions  claimed 
have  disappeared  under  the  re-examinations  of  a 
wiser  exegesis  of  Scripture;  many  have  been  re- 
moved by  the  advancing  discoveries  in  science  or 
history,  showing  that  it  was  not  the  Bible  that 
was  mistaken,  but  its  assailants ;  and  all  have  ad- 
mitted some  fair  and  reasonable  explanation. 

This  may  encourage  us,  when  new  difficulties 
are  alleged,  to  wait  candidly,  patiently,  and  hope- 
fully for  furtlier  light. 

But  furthermore,  this  fact  is  itself  a  tribute  of 
no  small  importance  to  the  accuracy  of  the  Bible, 
and  a  proof  that  more  than  human  wisdom  has 
presided  over  the  composition  of  its  pages.  Here 
is  a  volume  made  up  of  sixty-six  different  books, 
written  in  separate  sections,  by  scores  of  different 
persons,  during  a  period  of  fifteen  hundred  years,  — 
a  volume  antedating  in  its  earlfer  records  all  other 
books  in  the  world,  touching  human  life  and  knowl- 
edge at  hundreds  of  different  points.  Yet  it  avoids 
any  absolute,  assignable  error  in  dealing  with 
these  innumerable  themes.  Of  what  other  ancient 
book  can  this  be  said  ?  Of  what  book  even  one 
hundred  years  old  can  this  be  said  ? 


OBJECTIONS  ON  SCIENTIFIC   GROUNDS.       249 

The  sacred  books  of  India,  of  Zoroaster,  of  Mo- 
hammedanism, reveal  their  human  origin  by  the 
obvious  human  errors  they  distinctly  affirm,  by  the 
misconceptions  and  falsehoods  which  are  wrapped 
up  inextricably  in  their  theological  systems. 

In  like  manner,  the  works  on  Systematic  Theol- 
ogy so  late  as  the  Reformation  period,  and  equally 
with  them  the  philosophical  and  scientific  writings 
of  the  same  era,  or  even  of  four  or  five  generations 
ago,  are  marked  by  blunders  of  fact,  or  errors  of 
tlieory,  which  can  be  exposed  by  the  schoolboy 
of  to-day. 

These  books  are  comparatively  little  read  now. 
Their  mistakes  are  unknown  to  the  masses  of  even 
well-informed  men,  are  only  noticed  by  scholars 
who  know  how  to  account  for  them,  and  to  appre- 
ciate the  value  of  the  works,  notwithstanding  these 
deficiencies. 

Not  so  with  the  Bible.  Every  line  in  it  has  been 
subjected  to  a  minute,  jealous,  microscopic  scru- 
tiny, by  friend  and  by  foe,  such  as  no  other  writ- 
ing has  ever  experienced.  The  fires  of  criticism 
have  kindled  all  around  it  and  over  it,  hot  enough 
to  detect  and  to  burn  out  the  dross,  if  there  was 
any.  It  stands  to-day  the  book  in  all  the  world 
most  loved,  most  hated,  most  studied,  most  mis- 
used ;  the  book  upon  which  the  converging  light 
is  cast  from  every  source,  from  every  science  and 
from  every  age  of  human  research,  and  to  which 
the  concentrated   attention  of  the   most  vigorous 


250  BIBLE  DOCTRINE   OF  INSPIRATION. 

minds  of  the  race  has  been  directed  for  centuries. 
It  is  only  simple  justice  to  say,  that  it  stands  a 
monument  of  marvellous  accuracy. 

H.     Men  of  Science  of  the  highest  Rank  sustain 
the  Bible. 

Finally,  let  it  never  be  forgotten  that,  if  there 
be  scientific  men  who  assail  the  Bible,  there  are 
others,  equally  eminent  or  more  so,  who  defend  it ; 
men  not  less  honest  in  their  love  for  truth,  not  less 
zealous  and  candid  in  their  search  for  it,  and  not 
less  bold  and  frank  in  declaring  it  when  found.  If 
there  have  been  a  Voltaire  and  a  Diderot  to  assail 
it,  there  have  been  on  its  side  a  Newton  and  a 
Davy,  a  Hugh  Miller,  an  Agassiz,  a  Maury,  and  a 
Guyot.  If  there  are  a  Huxley  and  an  IngersoU  to 
attack,  there  are  a  Hitchcock,  a  Silliman,  a  Dana, 
a  Gray,  and  a  Dawson  to  defend  and  honor  it, — 
men  in  whom  devotion  has  not  blinded  the  eye  of 
science,  nor  learning  palsied  the  heart  of  piety. 
Even  among  the  votaries  of  pure  science,  who  have 
no  professed  acquaintance  with  theology,  or  who 
take  no  distinct  religious  position,  they  that  are 
with  us  as  to  the  divine  origin  of  the  Bible  are 
more  and  mightier  than  those  that  are  against  us. 


CHAPTER  VII. 
OBJECTIONS  FROM  INSIGNIFICANT  DETAILS. 

DID  the  Holy  Spirit  dictate  such  details,  it  is 
asked,  as  the  minute  instructions  for  the 
Tabernacle  and  the  Temple,  the  genealogies  of  pri- 
vate families  and  petty  tribes,  in  the  Old  Testament  ; 
or  such  as  the  salutations  to  friends  at  the  close  of 
several  epistles,  Paul's  medical  counsel  to  Timothy 
as  to  taking  remedies  for  his  stomach  and  infirmi- 
ties, or  the  communications  with  which  he  charges 
him  as  to  his  parchments  and  the  cloak  he  had  left 
at  Troas  ? 

1.  This  objection,  it  appears  to  us,  wholly  mis- 
conceives the  doctrine  which  we  advocate,  ignoring 
the  fact  that  we  affirm  and  vindicate  the  thoroughly 
human  quality  of  the  books.  This  feature  we  claim 
for  them  as  earnestly  as  their  divine  authority. 
The  objection  might  be  of  force  against  a  mechani- 
cal theory  of  inspiration,  which  admits  no  real 
human  authorship,  but  it  has  no  validity  against 
our  doctrine. 

2.  The  objection  also  ignores  the  obviously 
beneficial  and  valuable  design  of  some  of  these 
alleged  "  insignificant  details " ;   e.  g.  the  typical 


252  BIBLE  DOCTRINE  OF  INSPIRATION. 

object  of  the  Mosaic  ritual,  and  of  the  temple  ser- 
vices, and  the  indispensable  importance  of  the  gen- 
ealogies as  evidence  in  tracing  the  descent  of  the 
Messiah. 

3.  Further,  the  objection  fails  to  do  justice  to 
those  historical  passages  which  it  charges  with 
insignificance.  It  fails  to  appreciate  those  details 
which  it  calls  trivial.  It  is  just  in  these  slight 
circumstances  of  the  history  that  character  speaks 
out,  oftentimes,  in  the  most  affecting  and  instruct- 
ive way.  But  for  these  affectionate  greetings  to 
beloved  friends,  we  should  have  lacked  evidence  of 
the  genuine  tenderness  of  the  Apostle's  soul,  and 
we  might  have  been  told  that  Christianity  left  no 
room  for  the  virtue  of  friendship.  The  practical 
common-sense  advice  to  Timothy  is  no  encourage- 
ment to  intemperance,  but,  on  the  other  hand,  a 
strong  evidence  that  Timothy  was  abstemious  in 
principle  and  practice,  since  it  needed  Apostolic 
suggestion  and  urgency  to  induce  him  to  use  even 
"  a  little  wine,"  and  that  when  it  was  medicinally 
necessary. 

Again,  Paul's  concern  about  his  parchments  and 
other  books,  and  his  cloak,  is  to  our  minds  as  in- 
teresting a  circumstance  as  that  other  petty  but 
instructive  incident  of  the  little  old  man,  practical, 
helpful,  considerate  for  others,  after  the  shipwreck 
on  the  island  of  Malta,  bustling  around  to  gather 
up  fragments  of  sticks  to  make  a  fire  for  the  chilled 
and  dripping  company  that  had  been  rescued  from 


OBJECTIONS  FROM  INSIGNIFICANT  DETAILS.    253 

the  waves.  We  would  not  be  willing  to  spare  or 
lose  either,  on  any  consideration.  They  reveal  to 
us  the  man,  Paul ;  they  bring  us  nearer  to  him  in 
actual,  real  life. 

Consider  tlie  case  about  this  much  complained  of 
cloak.  Here  is  a  man  who,  some  thirty  years  ago, 
renounced  ease,  fortune,  popularity,  brilliant  pros- 
pects,—  all  for  Christ,  in  order  to  do  good  to  the 
souls  of  men.  He  has  had  his  reward  all  along, 
from  the  world  and  from  his  nation,  in  stripes, 
in  rod-beatings,  in  stonings,  in  imprisonments,  in 
treachery  and  deadly  conspiracy,  in  unblushing 
falsehoods,  in  unassuaged  malice.  And  now  his 
end  is  near.  He  is  advanced  in  years,  in  his  last 
prison,  his  usefulness  accomplished,  his  course 
finished.  He  is  just  awaiting  the  sentence  of 
death.  Bravely,  cheerfully,  triumphantly,  he  writes 
his  last  letter  to  his  dearest  friend,  his  son  in  the 
Gospel.  Not  a  note  quivers,  not  a  word  hints  of 
gloom  or  regret. 

But  he  is  shivering  with  cold.  Winter  is  com- 
mencing. He  is  in  want  of  clothes.  And  in  that 
prison  he  is  lonely.  He  cannot  solace  himself  by 
talking,  as  of  old,  to  the  guard  to  whom  he  was 
chained ;  nor  can  he,  as  formerly,  have  interviews 
with  the  hostile  Jews,  and  strive  to  convert  them, 
or  with  the  loving  Christians,  and  endeavor  to  com- 
fort them.  He  is  shut  off  from  such  intercourse. 
Some  of  the  Christians  themselves  are  afraid  or 
ashamed  now  to  stand  with  him ;  and  others  are 


254  BIBLE  DOCTRINE  OF  INSPIRATION. 

debarred  from  doing  what  they  would  for  him. 
Only  Luke  is  with  him,  sharing  apparently  his 
imprisonment  for  the  sake  of  alleviating  his  suf- 
ferings,—  Luke,  who  had  been  with  him  in  his 
imprisonment  at  Csesarea,  and  again  in  his  first 
imprisonment  at  Rome.  He  is  used  to  it :  he  has 
come  to  stand  by  him  to  the  last.  But  the  good 
man  wants  his  books,  especially  certain  beloved 
precious  parchments.  They  would  cheer  his  lonely 
hours.  He  needs  his  cloak,  he  wants  his  manu- 
scripts. Is  there  nothing  touching,  nothing  affect- 
ing in  this  ? 

We  read  witli  emotion  about  Jerome  of  Prague, 
"  shut  up  for  three  hundred  and  forty  days  in  the 
prisons  of  Constance,  in  the  bottom  of  a  dark  and 
fetid  tower,  and  never  allowed  to  leave  it  except  to 
appear  before  his  murderers  " ;  and  our  hearts  go 
out  in  sympathy  with  tlie  martyr.  We  read  of  the 
venerable  Bishop  Hooper  in  old  England,  "  dragged 
from  his  disgusting  cellar,  covered  with  wretched 
clothes  and  a  borrowed  cloak,  tottering  on  his 
staff,  and  bent  double  with  rheumatism  on  his  way 
to  the  stake,"  for  the  testimony  of  Jesus  ;  and  our 
hearts  kindle  anew  with  admiration  and  devotion. 
We  read  of  Judson  at  Oung-pen-la,  in  extremest 
peril  and  destitution,  ministered  to  by  that  godly 
wife,  his  life  only  saved  at  the  risk  of  her  own;  and 
we  feel  afresh  the  impulse  to  rise  to  similar  hero- 
ism. And  shall  not  these  venerable  martyrs,  these 
noble  missionaries,  remind  us  also  of  our  brother 


OBJECTIONS  FROM  INSIGNIFICANT  DETAILS.     255 

Paul,  shut  up  in  prison,  suffering  from  loneliness 
and  from  cold,  and  asking  for  his  cloak  ?  And 
shall  his  example  fail  to  stir  our  hearts,  or  excite 
our  sympathy  ?  —  "  We  behold  him,"  says  Haldane, 
"  standing  upon  the  confines  of  the  two  worlds, — 
in  this  world  about  to  be  beheaded  as  guilty,  by  the 
Emperor  of  Rome,  in  the  other  world  to  be  crowned 
as  righteous,  by  the  King  of  Kings ;  here  deserted 
by  men,  there  to  be  welcomed  by  angels  ;  here  in 
want  of  a  cloak  to  cover  him,  there  to  be  clothed  / 
upon  with  his  house  from  heaven."  -^ 

We  put  a  high  value  upon  that  cloak,  and  the 
little  passage  that  alludes  to  it. 

In  like  manner  we  might  take  up,  as  Gaussen 
has  done  very  instructively  (Origin  and  Inspiration 
of  the  Bible,  pp.  317-322),  the  greetings  at  the  close 
of  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  and  show  the  mani- 
fold and  precious  instructions  which  come  to  us 
from  them.  Mere  lists  of  names,  we  are  told  ;  per- 
sonal reminiscences  of  his  friendships  ;  dry  nomen- 
clature of  eighteen  people,  all  in  oblivion  otherwise : 
to  give  these  needed  no  inspiration. 

On  the  contrary,  we  are  specially  thankful  for 
these  very  sixteen  verses,  giving  us  a  living  picture 
of  a  primitive  Church,  and  casting  a  flood  of  light 
on  the  reorganization  of  heathen  society  under  the 
influence  of  Christianity.  And  we  do  not  see  why 
inspiration  might  not  suggest,  as  well  as  affection 
prompt,  these  kindly  fraternal  allusions. 

But  we  almost  shrink  from  pursuing  this  line  of 


256  BIBLE   DOCTRINE   OF  INSPIRATION. 

argument,  for  it  seems  as  if,  in  such  defences  of 
what  is  contained  in  the  Word  of  God,  we  are  in 
danger  of  exalting  ourselves  to  the  position  of 
judges  of  what  should  and  what  should  not  be  con- 
tained in  a  revelation  from  God.  A  man  who  is 
fully  competent  for  such  judgment  is  competent  to 
make  a  revelation. 

As  Gaussen  has  said,  "  It  strikes  us  that  there 
is  no  arrogance  to  be  compared  with  that  of  a  man 
who,  owning  the  Bible  to  be  from  God,  then  makes 
bold  to  sift  with  his  hand  the  pure  in  it  from  what 
is  impure,  the  inspired  from  what  is  uninspired, 
God  from  man.  This  is  to  overturn  all  the  foun- 
dation of  the  faith ;  it  amounts  to  placing  it  no 
more  in  believing  God,  but  in  believing  ourselves." 
(p.  313.) 

"  There  are  those  to-day,"  says  Mr.  McConaughy, 
(in  the  Sunday  School  Times,  1880,  p.  551,)  "  who 
know  just  what  God  ought  to  do,  and  their  judg- 
ment, rather  than  what  he  pleases,  is  their  crite- 
rion. They  measure  their  God  with  a  yardstick. 
They  sound  him  with  a  plumb-line.  They  calcu- 
late him  by  mathematics.  They  bring  him  to  the 
test  of  science.  They  regulate  him  according  to 
right  reason,  —  that  is,  their  own.  They  prescribe 
the  exact  limits  within  which  he  may  work  ;  and 
then,  having  made  him  altogether  such  a  one  as 
themselves,  having  robbed  him  of  his  Godhead, 
they  fall  down  and  worship  the  God  of  their  own 
hands." 


CONCLUSION. 

WE  have  now  completed  the  plan  we  proposed. 
We  have  attempted  to  set  forth, /;*s^,  the 
Doctrine  of  Inspiration,  with  such  distinctions  and 
explanations  as  seemed  proper  to  make  it  clear ; 
second,  the  Proofs,  indirect  and  direct,  by  which 
we  believe  it  is  sustained ;  and  third,  the  Objections 
most  commonly  urged,  with  such  replies  as  ap- 
peared suitable  and  practicable  within  our  brief 
space. 

The  result  of  the  whole  investigation  has  been, 
we  trust,  adapted  to  remove  difficulties  which  have 
been  in  the  way  of  many  thoughtful  and  earnest 
students,  who  had  a  general  conviction  of  the 
divine  authority  of  the  Scriptures,  but  did  not  see 
how  this  was  to  be  reconciled  with  some  of  the 
conclusions  of  modern  scholarship.  Our  labor  was 
commenced  with  a  distinct  belief  that  thorough 
and  candid  inquiry  would  subserve  the  interests  of 
the  cause  of  Christ ;  that  truth  has  nothing  to  lose, 
but  everything  to  gain,  from  fair  investigation ; 
and  that  to  one  who  earnestly  and  prayerfully 
seeks,  God  will  give  guidance  and  satisfaction. 

17 


258  CONCLUSION. 

Having  found  the  subject  cleared  up  to  our  own 
mind  by  these  studies,  we  have  ventured  to  submit 
them  to  the  inspection  of  friends,  and  now  of  the 
general  public,  in  the  humble  hope  tliat  they  may 
convince  opponents,  and  reclaim  the  doubting  to  a 
real  and  rejoicing  faith  in  the  Bible  as  God's  Word 
to  Man. 


INDEXES. 


i:n^dex  I. 

SUBJECTS   AND   PERSONS. 


FAOB 

Abbot,  Ezra 224 

Abbott,  Lyman 217 

Accuracy  of  transcription  of 

Scripture 221 

Actual  influence  of  Christian- 
ity      216 

Ayag  slain 206 

Alford,  Henry      ....   33,  131 
Analogy  of  all  God's  commu- 
nications     193 

Anathema  against  any  other 

gospel 164 

Apocrypha 115 

Apostles  authorized  by  Christ  148 
Arnold,  Thomas   ....     42,  56 

Assertions  of  inspiration    .     .  158 

Augustan  age  of  Rome       .     .  101 

Authenticity  of  the  Scriptures  22 
Autliorship   both   divine   and 

human 26 

Balaam 81,  197 

Bannerman,  James    15,  16,  29,  30, 
39,  87,  107,  114,  143 

Bartlett,  S.  C 202 

Beck,  J.  T 53 

Belief  of  the  Jewish  people     .     115 
Believers  are  servants  of  right- 
eousness     187 

Bengel 83 

Bentley,  Richard 224 

Bezaleel 73 

Bible  not  advice  but  command      15 


PAGE 

Bibliolatr}',  a  new  term  of  re- 
proach        75 

Butler,  Bishop,  his  Analogy  174,193 

Canon 22 

Carpzovius 45 

Carson,  Alexander  .  .  46,  52,  87 
Change  in  the  Apostles  .  .  156 
Christian  consciousness  .  .  50 
Christ  wrote  nothing  .  .  .  148 
Claims  of  the  Bible  ....  Ill 
Clarke,  J.  Freeman  ....  56 
Claudius  Lysias,  his  letter  .  38,  86 
Coleridge.  S.  T.  .  .  .  56,  86,  103 
Consciousness  not  destroyed  .  68 
Consistency  of  all  truth  .  .  236 
Credibility  not  dependent  on 

inspiration 16 

Crispus  baptized 191 

Critical  objections  to  inspira- 
tion  218 

Criticism  ..<....  21,  218 
Cultivation  of  the  docile  spirit  16 
Cumulative  argument  .  .  .  108 
Curtis,  Thomas  F.    .     .     .     56,  58 


Dagg,  John  L.  .  . 
Dana,  Prof.  James  . 
Daniel,  genuineness  of 
Dawson,  J.  W.  .  . 
Death  for  idolatry  . 
Deficiencies  of  an  uninspired 
Bible 


66 
246 
233 
246 

209 

15 


262 


INDEX. 


PAGE 

Definitions  of  inspiration    .     .  37 

Degrees  of  inspiration   ...  52 

Dick,  John 53 

Different  eras  used    ....  200 
Difficulties  in  the  Bible      .     .  192 
Direct    evidence    of    inspira- 
tion       104,  114 

Disclaimers  of  inspiration  .     .  179 
Discrepancies  alleged  in  the 

Bible 195 

founded   on   misinterpre- 
tation       195 

founded   on   mistakes  as 

to  facts 196 

Distinctions  to  be  noticed  .     .  20 

Divorce  laws 124 

Doddridge,  Philip    ....  53 

Double  authorship  of  the  Bible  30 


ECCLESIASTES 231 

Echoes  from  the  Old  Testa- 
ment in  the  New    .     .     .  116 
Elisha's   misleading  the    Sy- 
rians       207 

Elymas  denounced    ....  145 

Errors  in  transcription  .     .   82,  200 

Evidences  of  Christianity  .     .  23 
Extermination  of  the  Canaan- 

ites 207 

Failures  due  to  neglect  of 

the  Bible 217 

Farrar,  F.  W.       ...    56,  58,  64 

Fasting 125 

Fisher,  George  P 202 

Food,  clean  and  unclean    .     .  125 
Forgetfulness  of  Paul    .     .     .  191 
Form  of  the  evidence  of  inspi- 
ration     109 

Four-sided  view  of  the  Gos- 
pel history 199 


Garbett,  Edward  ....      34 
Gardiner,  Frederic   .    114,  116,  212 

Gardner,  W.  W 37 

Gaussen 255 


Genuineness  defined 
Gladstone,  William  E. 
Goodwin,  Harvev  . 
Graf  ....'.. 
Greenleaf,  Judge 
Griesbach  .... 
Guyot,  Arnold     .     . 


PAGE 

21 
246 

77 
229 
202 

83 
246 


Haley,  John  W.     .     .     .    .    203 
Henderson,  Enoch    .     .     .    53,  101 
Higlier  Criticism      ...    21,  228 
Historical  accuracy  of  Evan- 
gelists   105 

Hodge,  Charles 56 

Hooker,  Richard       ....     173 

Hooker,  Robert 45 

Hooper,  Bishop 254 

Hume,  David 23 

Humphrev,  E.  P 34 

Huxley,  Thos 246 


Idolatry  punished  by  death  209 
Illumination  different  from  in- 
spiration    40 

Imperfection  is  not  error   .     .  210 
Importance  of  the  doctrine  of 

Inspiration 13 

Individuality  preserved     .     .  68 

Insignificant  details       .     .     .  251 

Inspiration  an  act,  or  a  result  25 

of  the  men   and  also  of 

the  books 26 

defined 37 

partial 48 

degrees  of 52 

natural 54 

universal 56 

plenary 59 

negative  statements  of    .  61 

not  to  be  explained     .     .  61 

not  mere  stimulus  ...  69 

not  omniscience      78, 190,  191 

did  not  impl}'  sinlessness  81 

positive  statement  of  .     .  90 
presumptive      argument 

for 93 

said  to  be  disclaimed  .     .  179 


INDEX. 


263 


Inspiration    not    inconsistent 

with  careful  inquiry    .     .     180 

Interpretations    of    Scripture 

nia}'  be  erroneous  .     .     .    238 


Jael's  killing  Sisera     .     .     .  206 

Jephthah's  daughter      .     .     .  206 

Jerome  of  Prague;     ....  254 

.Job  ...     .       .....  85 

John's  Gospel,  its  authorship  232, 

234 

Judson,  Adoniram    ....  254 


KuENEN,  A 55,  229 


Ladd,  George  T.,  37,  47,  49,  110, 
117,  123,  140,  161,  210,  232 
Last  discourse  of  our  Lord  .  151 
Lee,  William  .  .  .  151,  153,  156 
Limits  of  possible  error      .     .    221 

Lipscomb,  A.  A 103 

Liturgy,  the  English     ...       74 

Locke,  John 23 

Luke's  place  in  the  Canon      .    181 


MacNaught,  John      ...      76 

Maimonides 49 

Marriage  laws  .  .  .  124,  182 
Martineau,  James     ....       56 

Maurice,  F.  D 42,  74 

McConaughy 256 

McCosh,  President  James  .     .     245 
Mechanical  inspiration  .     .      44,  63 
Ministers  should  search  thor- 
oughly       17 

Minute  circumstances  foretold  132 
Miracles  the  testimony  of  God  106 
Mistakes  in  transcription  .  82,  200 
Moral   grandeur   of   Biblical 

ethics 215 

Moral  objections  to  inspiration    205 

Morell,  J.  D 55 

Mosaic  authorship  of  Penta- 
teuch     232 


PAGE 

Natural  inspiration    ...  54 

Neander 56 

Negative  statements  of  inspi- 
ration     61 

Newman,  F.  W 55 

Objections  to  plenary  inspi- 
ration   179 

Obscurities  in  the  Bible     .     .  102 

Olshausen,  H 172 

Opinions  not  sanctioned     .     .  84 

Oracles  of  God 142 

Osgood,  Howard 114 

Pantheism 75 

Park,  Edwards  A 37 

Parker,  Theodore      ....  55 

Partial  inspiration     ....  48 

Patton,  F.  L 17,  37 

Paul's  cloak 252 

Paul's  conversion,  different  ac- 
counts    199 

Paulus 156 

Peirce,  B.  K 33 

Pentateuch 98,  232 

Pentecostal  blessings  .  .  .  157 
Permanence  of  the  object  .  .  94 
Personal  experiences  recorded  214 
Phenomena  of  Scripture  .  .  109 
Phenomenal  language  not  un- 
true        241 

Physical  Science  not  the  sub- 

"  ject  of  the  Bible      .     .     .  237 

Plenary  Inspiration  ....  59 

Polygamy 209 

Post-Reformation  dogma    .     .  32 
Postulates  underlying  the  ar- 
gument       110 

Presumptive  argument  ...  93 
Progressive  nature  of  revela- 
tion    212 

Promise  of  the  Father    .     .     .  157 
Prophecy  not  of  private  inter- 
pretation    137 

Prophets  of  Old  Testament    .  99 

Prophetic  order  reappearing  .  127 
Providential   guardianship  of 

the  Scripture      ....  220 

Psalms 99 


264 


INDEX. 


QUENSTEDT,  J.  A 44 


Rabbinical  dialectic  . 
Raliab's  falsehood  .  . 
Rationalist  position  .  . 
Relation  of  the  Gentiles  to 

Church      .... 
Religion  of  the  Book 
Retaliation  recognized   . 
Revelation   different   from 
spiration    .     . 

gradual  and  deliberate 
Robertson,  Frederick  W 
Roman  Catholic  view    . 
Round  numbers  used     . 
Rule  of  faith    .... 


the 


170 

206 

41 

158 

13 

208 

36 
154 

56 

41 
200 

22 


Sabbath  regulations  .  .  .  123 
Sadducees,  their  error  .  .  .  131 
Samuel  slaving  Agag    .     .     .     206 

Schaff,  Philip 32,  224 

Schleierniacher  .  .  .  .  42,  56 
Scientific     conclusions    often 

misleading 239 

Scientific    objections    to    the 

Bible 235 

Sears,  E.  H 234 

Semler 49 

Simplicity  and  majest}'  of  the 

Bible     ......     113 

Smith,  Justin  A 36 

Solomon's  writings  prudential 

and  worldly  .  .  .  .208,  213 
Source  of  proof  of  inspiration  .  104 
Sources  of  misapprehension    .       18 


PAGE 

Spheres  of  the  Spirit's  opera- 
tions        70 

Spirit  of  Truth 152 

Spoiling  of  the  Egyptians  .     .  206 

Stanley,  Dean  A.  1*.      ...  67 

Strauss 156 

Strong,  Augustus  H.    .     .     37,  55 
Supernatural  interposition  im- 
plied      23 


Telegraph  operator    ...  79 

Termination  of  apostolic  office  155 

Tertullus 87 

Testimony  of  God     .     .     .     .  106 

Testimony  of  inspired  men     .  107 

Text  criticism      ....   21,  219 

Thaddeus 198 

Tholuck 56,  131 

Tischendorf,  C 83 

Transcviption  of  the  Bible      .  201 

Tregelles,  S.  P 83 

Typical  nature  of  Mosaic  rit- 
ual    252 


Various  readings 


223,  225 


Westcott  and  Hort    .     .     .  222 

Westcott,  B.  F.    .     .     33,  100,  131 

Wilkinson,  W.  C 37 

Wilson,  Bishop  Daniel       .     .  53 
Witnesses  to  the  fact  of  inspi- 
ration    105 

Woods,  Leonard 53 

Word  of  God  the  standard     .  14 


INDEX  11. 

BIBLE  PASSAGES  DISCUSSED. 


Exodus. 

PAGE 

iii.  6,  15 170 

iv.  10-16 136,  145 

vii.  1,  2 136 

XX.  12 140,  169 

Deutekonomy. 
xviii,  15-22 136, 145 

2  Samuel. 
xxiii.  2 159 

Psalms. 

vi.  9 214 

Ixxiii.  17-26 214 

ex.  1 143, 169 

Isaiah, 

i.  2 159 

vi.  9 171 

lix.  21 146 

Jeremiah. 

i.  1-9 147.159 

XV.  19 ,    .159 

EZEKIEL. 

i.  3 159 


Matthew. 

PAGE 

i.  22 144,  171 

ii.  15 144,  171 

V.  17,  18 118,  132 

ix.  14,  17 125 

x.  14-20 149 

xi.  13 121 

xii.  1-8 123 

XV.  1-20 125,  169 

XV.  8 140 

xviii.  18 149, 150 

xix.  3-12 119,  124 

xxii.  31 170 

xxii.  43 143,  170 

xxviii.  19,  20 149, 150 

Mark. 

ii.  18-22 125 

ii.  23-28 123 

vii.  1-16 125,  169 

x.  2-12 124 

xii.  37 170 

xiii.  9-11 149 

xiv.  49 132 

xvi.  9-20 106,  222 

Luke. 

i.  3 179 

v.  33-39 125 

vi.  1-5 123 

xii.  11,  12 149 

xvi.  16,  17 121 

xvi.  29-31 121 


266 


INDEX. 


PAGE 

XX.  37 170 

xxi.  14,  15 149 

xxiv.  45 133,  157 

xxiv.  48 173 

John. 

V.  39 117 

vii.  53 222 

viii.  1-11 .    222 

X.  34-36 132,  141 

xii.  39-41 171 

xiv.  25,  26 151 

XV.  26,27 151,173 

xvi.  12-15 151 

xix.  24,  28 132 

XX.  31 162 

Acts. 

i.  8 149, 173 

i.  16 171 

iv.  8 144 

iv.  25,  26 144 

V.  32 173 

X.  28 145,  158 

xiii.  9 145 

XV.  1-6 162 

XV.  28 173 

xxviii.  25 171 


Romans. 


iii.  2  .  . 
vi.  18,  19 
ix.  17  . 
xvi.  25-27 


...  142 
...  187 
...  130 
134,  137,  162 


1  Corinthians. 

i.  16 191 

ii.  10-14 42,  163 

vii.  6-25 181 

xiv.  37 161,  163 

2  Corinthians. 

viii.  8,  10 183 

xi.  17 187 


PAGE 

xii.  2,  3  . 

.       .       190 

xiii.  2,  3 

.     .     163 

Galatiaks. 

i.  8-12     . 

.  162,  164 

iii.  8  .     . 

.     .     130 

Ephesians. 

ii.  20  .     . 

IGl,  164 

iii.  1-7    . 

.     .     165 

1  Timothy. 

V.  18       . 

129 

2  Timothy. 

iii.  16      . 

.     .     133 

1  Thessalonians. 


ii.  13  . 
iv.  2-15 


142,165 
.     166 


2  Thessalonians. 
ii.  13-15 162, 166 

Hebrews. 

iii.  7 144,  172 

ix.  8 172 

1  Peter. 

i.  10-12 135,  166 

2  Peter. 

i.  19-21 28,  137 

iii.  2 128,  167 

iii.  16 128,  130 

Revelation. 


i.  1-3 167 

xxii.  6-19 167 


Date  Due 

^cr  3-     42 

L 

:V.«..A.A-^ 

...  ...*PI     NIPiP 

f 

i<. 

'"'^^HlWl^fl^Pil 

H 

r£fi(ir 

u  m^ 

MAR   ( 

^000 

3 

f 

BS480.(VI27K« 

The  Bible  doctrine  of  Inspiration 

Princeton  Theological  Seminary-Speer  Library 


1    1012  00052  2591 


